Skip to main content

Full text of "The University of Kansas science bulletin"

See other formats


HARVARD  UNIVERSITY 


LIBRARY 


OF  THE 

Museum  of  Comparative  Zoology 


X,  °\ss 


AUG  2  5.  W* 


BULLETIN  of 

The  University  of  Kansas 


SCIENCE  BULLETIN 

(Continuation  of  Kansas  University  Qva  rtoriy) 


Vol.  XXIII 


LAWRENCE,  KANSAS 
Published  Semimonthly 


Vol.  36 


July  15,  1935 


No.  14 


Entered  as  second-class  matter  December  29,  1910,  at  the  post  office  at 
Lawrence,  Kansas,  under  act  of  July  18,  1894 

16-1123 


NOTICE  TO  EXCHANGES 

The  attention  of  learned  societies  and  other  institutions  which 
exchange  scientific  publications  with  the  University  of  Kansas  is 
called  to  the  list  of  publications  of  this  University  on  the  third  and 
fourth  pages  of  the  cover  of  this  issue. 

Those  marked  "Supply  exhausted"  cannot  be  furnished  at  all;  as 
far  as  the  supply  permits  the  remaining  numbers  will  be  furnished 
to  any  of  our  exchanges  who  may  need  them  to  complete  their  files. 

Back  numbers  of  the  Kansas  University  Quarterly,  as  far  as  pos- 
sible, will  be  sent  to  those  of  our  newer  correspondents  who  are  able 
and  willing  to  reciprocate.     Separates  are  available  to  specialists. 


ANNOUNCEMENT 

The  Kansas  University  Science  Bulletin  (continuation  of  the 
Kansas  University  Quarterly)  is  issued  in  parts  at  irregular  inter- 
vals. Each  volume  contains  from  300  to  400  pages  of  reading  mat- 
ter, with  necessary  illustrations.  Exchanges  with  other  institutions 
and  learned  societies  everywhere  are  solicited.  All  exchanges  should 
be  addressed  to  the  Library  of  the  University  of  Kansas. 

The  Kansas  University  Science  Bulletin, 
Library  of  the  University  of  Kansas, 

Lawrence,  Kan. 


EDITORIAL  BOARD 

H.  B.  Hungerford,  Chairman.  C.  M.  Baker. 

E.  H.  Taylor,  Secretary.  0.  O.  Stoland. 

J.  D.  Stranathan.  R.  C.  Moore. 
A.  W.  Davidson. 


AUG  2  5  1936 

THE 

kansas  university 
Science  Bulletin 


DEVOTED    TO 

THE  PUBLICATION  OF  THE  RESULTS  OF 

RESEARCH  BY  MEMBERS  OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  KANSAS 


Vol.  XXIII 

(Whole  Series..  Vol.  NXXIII) 


f;^--        '     '      I      7  ' 


PUBLISHED   BY   THE    UNIVERSITY 

LAWRENCE,    KANSAS 

1935 


PRINTED    BY    KANSAS    STATE    PRINTING     PLANT 

W.     C.    AUSTIN.    STATE      PRINTER 

TOPEKA      1935 

10-1123 


f/#- 1- 


A  TAXOXOMIC  STUDY 

OF   THE 

Cosmopolitan  Scincoid  Lizards 

OF   THE 

Genus  EUMECES 

WITH   AN 

ACCOUNT  OF  THE  DISTRIBUTION  AND  RELATIONSHIPS 

OF  ITS  SPECIES 

BY 

Edward  H.  Taylor 
(3) 


PREFACK 


[n  1926,  when  the  plan  of  this  work  was  conceived,  I  began  to 
assemble  at  the  University  of  Kansas  a  collection  of  Eumeces  that 
would  serve  as.  a  working  basis  for  such  a  study.  These  collections 
were  accumulated  slowly,  since  only  certain  summer  months  were 
available  to  me  for  collecting,  and  since  the  species  are,  save  for 
one  or  two,  extremely  elusive  and  difficult  of  accession.  In  the 
summer  of  1927,  collections  were  made  in  Arkansas  and  Tennessee; 
in  1928.  in  Kansas;  in  1929,  in  New  Mexico,  Arizona  and  California; 
in  1930,  in  Texas,  New  Mexico,  Arizona,  California,  Nevada  and 
Utah;  in  1931,  in  Oklahoma,  Texas,  New  Mexico  and  Colorado. 
Thus  much  first-hand  information  on  habits  and  habitats  was  ob- 
tained. 

In  1932,  accompanied  by  Hobart  Smith,  I  ventured  into  Mexico. 
Here,  it  was  apparent,  was  a  fairly  accessible  terra  incognita  that 
held  the  answer  to  many  relationship  problems  and  which  doubtless 
still  had  undiscovered  species.  It  was  a  critical  region  and  larger 
series  of  known  species  were  needed  before  the  relationship  of 
Mexican  and  American  forms  could  be  understood.  This  Mexican 
journey  carried  us  into  seventeen  Mexican  states  and  rewarded  us 
with  more  than  a  hundred  specimens  of  these  skinks,  certain  of 
which  represented  species  apparently  new  to  science.  However,  the 
very  disheartening  fact  remained  that  we  had  failed  to  obtain  several 
rare  forms  long  known  to  science,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  search 
was  made  in  the  type  localities  in  some  cases. 

The  summer  of  1933  was  spent  in  Eastern  museums,  examining 
and  reexamining  specimens. 

In  1934  I  journeyed  in  western  Mexico  in  the  states  of  Sonora, 
Sinaloa  and  Nayarit.  Here  I  met  with  most  disheartening  results 
as  regards  Eumeces.  In  the  two  months  collecting  (although  more 
than  1,500  specimens  were  collected)  only  a  single  specimen  of 
Eumeces  was  taken.  Hobart  Smith,  in  1934,  accompanied  by  David 
Dunkle,  made  a  journey  into  northwestern  Mexico  in  the  states  of 
Chihuahua,  Durango,  Zacatecas  and  Nuevo  Leon,  and  while  gener- 
ally successful,  likewise  obtained  only  a  single  specimen  of  Eumeces. 

Aside  from  the  material  segregated  at  Kansas  University,  I  have 
been  fortunate  in  having  been  permitted  to  examine  preserved  speci- 
mens belonging  to  all  the  larger  American  Museums  and  many  of  the 
smaller  ones. 

(5) 


6  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

In  1928  I  learned  that  Dr.  Charles  Burt  had  likewise  in  mind  a 
study  of  the  genus  Eumeces  and  we  agreed  to  combine  our  efforts. 
Doctor  Burt,  during  the  summers  of  the  two  succeeding  years, 
collected  data  on  specimens  in  the  American  Museum  of  Natural 
History  and  the  Harvard  Museum  of  Comparative  Zoology.  In 
1931  Doctor  Burt,  due  to  press  of  other  work  and  the  difficulties 
involved  in  our  being  in  separate  localities,  withdrew  from  the  under- 
taking, but  very  generously  made  available  to  me  his  accumulated 
data. 

Owing  to  the  necessity  of  having  available  more  detailed  data 
than  had  been  taken,  I  reexamined  the  specimens  at  Harvard  and 
the  American  Museum  and  in  most  cases  checked  the  data  taken 
by  Doctor  Burt.  In  cases  where  this  was  not  done  acknowledgment 
is  made  to  Doctor  Burt  in  the  text  where  his  data  are  used. 

The  work  in  its  present  form  was  completed  November  28,  1934. 

Edward  Harrison  Taylor. 

Lawrence,  Kansas. 


TABLE  OF  COXTKXTS 


TAfiE 

Preface 5 

Table  of  Contexts 7 

List  of  Illustrations 10 

Text  figures 10 

Plates 14 

Introduction 21 

Acknowledgments 22 

Methods  and  materials 24 

Illustrations 26 

Type  specimens 27 

Classification  of  the  Genus  Eumeces 29 

Genus  Eumeces  Wiegmann 29 

Synonymy 29 

History 30 

Generic  Relationships 34 

Groups  Within  the  Genus 35 

Eumeces  a  Generic  Entity 36 

Phtlogenetic  Tree 38 

Generic  Description 39 

Description  of  the  Skeletal  Elements  of  Eumeces 39 

General  Distribution 48 

Mexican  and  Central  American  forms 49 

Canadian  and  American  forms 53 

Eastern  Asiatic  forms 55 

African  and  western  Asiatic  forms 57 

Habitat  of  Eumeces 58 

Feeding  Habits 61 

Defense  Habits 62 

Breeding  Habits  and  Life  History 63 

Growth 66 

Speciatiox  axd  Mode  of  Evolution 67 

Sexual  Dimorphism 69 

Consideration  and  Evaluation  of  Specific  Characters  Used  in  De- 
scriptions    70 

Key  to  the  Species  of  Eumeces  Wiegmann 81 

Taxonomic  Considerations 93 

Schwartzei  group 93 

Eumeces  schwartzei  Fischer 94 

Eumeces  altamirani  Duges 102 

Eumeces  managuae  Dunn 104 

Taeniolatus  group 110 

Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth) Ill 

Schneiderii  group 119 

Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin) 126 

Eumeces  pavimentatus  (Geoff roy-St.  Hillaire) 133 

(7) 


Contents 

PAGE 

Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald) 138 

Eumeces  zarudnyi  Nikolsky 142 

Eumeces  blythianus  (Anderson) 143 

Eumeces  algeriensis  (Peters) 146 

Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters) 146 

Eumeces  algeriensis  meridionalis  Domergue 152 

Longirostris  group 154 

Eumeces  longirostris  (Cope) 155 

Lynxe  group 162 

Eumeces  lynxe  (Wiegmann) 163 

Eumeces  lynxe  lynxe  (Wiegmann) 163 

Eumeces  lynxe  furcirostris  (Cope) 173 

Sumichrasti  group 178 

Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope) 178 

Fasciatus  group 186 

American  species: 

Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus) 188 

Eumeces  laliceps  (Schneider) 212 

Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor 224 

Asiatic  species: 

Eumeces  tunganus  Stejneger 234 

Eumeces  xanthi  Giinther 239 

Eumeces  elegans  Boulenger 245 

Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson 253 

Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson 260 

Eumeces  barbouri  Van  Denburgh 265 

Eumeces  marginatus  (Hallowell) 267 

Eumeces  okadae  (Stejneger) 272 

Eumeces  latiscutatus  (Hallowell) 276 

Brevilineatus  group 283 

Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope 283 

Eumeces  callicephalus  Bocourt 290 

Eumeces  letragrammus  (Baird) 298 

Obsoletus  group 304 

Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girarcl) 305 

Eumeces  chinensis  (Gray) 320 

Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  (Gray) 320 

Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron) 328 

Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger 334 

Multivirgatus  group 340 

Eumeces  multivirgatus  (Hallowell) 341 

Eumeces  gaigei  Taylor 353 

Eumeces  humilis  Boulenger 358 

Eumeces  parvulus  Taylor 363 

Eumeces  parviauricidatus  Taylor 368 

Anthracinus  group 372 

Eumeces  anthracinus  (Baird) 373 

Eumeces  copei  Taylor 387 


Contents  9 

PAGE 

Eumeces  septentrionalis  (Baird) 394 

Eumeces  septentrionalis  septentrionalis  (Baird) 394 

Eumeces  septentrionalis  obtusirostris  (Bocourt) 405 

Skiltonianus  group 410 

Eumeces  skiltonianus  (Baird  and  Girard) 415 

Eumeces  skiltonianus  skiltonianus  (Baird  and  Girard) 415 

Euvieees  skilto7iianus  brevipes  Cope 428 

Eumeces  lagunensis  Van  Denburgh 431 

Eumeces  gilberti  Van  Denburgh 438 

Eumeces  gilberti  gilberti  Van  Denburgh 438 

Eumeces  gilberti  rubricaudatus  subsp.  nov 446 

Quadrilineatus  group 451 

Eumeces  quadrilineatus  (Blyth) 452 

Brevirostris  group 457 

Eumeces  brevirostris  (Gunther) 459 

Eumeces  indubitus  Taylor 466 

Eumeces  dugesii  Thominot 472 

Eumeces  colimensis  Taylor 47^ 

Eumeces  dicei  Ruthven  and  Gaige 4S2 

Eumeces  ochoterenae  Taylor 485 

Egregius  group 490 

Eumeces  egregius  (Baird) 490 

Eumeces  egregius  egregius  (Baird) 490 

Eumeces  egregius  onocrepis  (Cope) 497 


10  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS 


FIGURES 

FlGtTtE  PAGE 

1 .  Phylogenesis  in  the  genus  Eumeces  Wiegmann 38 

2.  Skulls  of  Eumeces.     (1)  Eumeces  chinensis  (Gray)  Amoy,  China.    Male. 

E.H.T.   Coll.  No.   880;    (2)  Same,   ventral  view.     (3)  Eumeces  ob- 
soletus   (Baird  and  Girard),  Lawrence,  Kansas.     E.H.T.  Coll.  No. 

881.     (4)  Same,  ventral  view.     From  Kingman  (1933) 40 

2a.  Skulls  of  Eumeces.  (1)  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider).  K.U.  No.  9127, 
Imboden,  Ark.,  Byron  Marshall,  Coll.  Adult  female;  dorsal  view. 
(2)  Same  specimen,  ventral  view.  (3)  Eumeces  pavimentatus 
(Geoffroy-St,  Hillaire).  E.H.T.  No.  860,  Haiffa,  Syria.  Dorsal 
view.     (4)  Same  specimen,  ventral  view.     From  Kingman  (1933),     41 

3.  Distribution  of  the  genus  Eumeces  Wiegmann 49 

4.  Head  plates  of  Eumeces.     A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 

head;  C,  ventral  surface  of  head;  D,  region  of  eye 71 

5.  Eumeces  schwartzei  Fischer.     Mich.  U.  No.  68226,  Chichen-Itza,    Yu- 

catan. A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  17.6  mm.;  width,  16  mm 96 

6.  Distribution  of  the  species  of  the  Schwartzei  group 101 

7.  Eumeces  managuae  Dunn.     U.S.N.M.  No.  89474,  Managua,  Nicaragua. 

A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.     Actual  head  length, 

15  mm. ;  width,  13  mm 106 

8.  Eumeces  managuae  Dunn.     British  Museum  No.  53.8.17.6.     A,  lateral 

view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length,  14.4  mm. ; 
width,  14.5  mm 109 

9.  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth).     E.H.T.  Collection,  Puli  Hatun,  Trans- 

caspia.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  13  mm.;  width,  11  mm 114 

10.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth),  Eumeces  princeps   (Eich- 

wald)  and  Eumeces  zarudnyi  Nikolsky 118 

11.  Eumeces  schneiderii   (Daudin).     E.H.T.   No.   6521,   Haiffa,   Syria.     A, 

lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.     Actual  head  length, 

24  mm. ;  width,  23  mm 128 

12.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin),  E.  algcriensis  algeriensis 

(Peters),  E.  algeriensis  mcridionalis  Domergue,  and  Eumeces  pavi- 
mentatus (Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire) 134 

13.  Eumeces  parimentatus  (Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire).     K.U.  No.  11022,  Haiffa, 

Syria.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  19.2  mm.;  width,  16  mm.  (The  rostral  extends  more 
to  the  upper  surface  than  is  shown.) 135 

14.  Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald).     K.U.  No.  11020,  Transcaspia.     A,  lat- 

eral view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
18.2  mm. ;  width,  15  mm 139 

15.  Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters).     K.U.  No.  11019,  Casablanca, 

Morocco.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  30  mm. ;  width,  29  mm 148 

16.  Eumeces  longirostris  (Cope).     K.U.  No.  7280,  Castle  Island,  Bermuda 

Islands.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  14  mm. ;  width,  12  mm 157 

17.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  longirostris  (Cope) 162 

18.  Distribution  of  members  of  the  Lynxe  group 163 

19.  Eumeces   lynxe   lynxe   (Wiegmann).     A.M.N.H.   No.    12S35,    Hidalgo, 

Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  9.3  mm. ;  width,  8  mm 166 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  11 

LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued 
Figure  page 

20.  Eumeces  lynxe  furcirostris  (Cope).     E.H.T.  &  II. M.S.  No.  2517,  young; 

Toxtlacuaya,  Vera  Cruz,  Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal 
view  of  head.     Actual  head  length,  5.3  mm.;  width,  4.2  mm 174 

21.  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope).     Type,  U.S.N. M.  No.  6601,  ''Orizaba," 

Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  16.2mm.;  width,  15mm.  Drawing  by  Dr.  Doris 
Cochran.  The  depth  of  the  head  is  slightly  greater  than  the  draw- 
ing shows 181 

22.  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope).     Paratype,  E.  schmidti  Dunn,  F.M.N.H. 

No.  13004,  Tela,  Honduras.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal 
view  of  head.     Actual  head  length,  11.5  mm.;  width,  10  mm 184 

23.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope) 186 

24.  Lacerta  cauda  caerulea.     From  Catesby,  ''The  Natural  History  of  Car- 

olina, Florida  and  the  Bahama  Islands,"  vol.  II,  pi.  67.  Somewhat 
reduced 192 

25.  Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus).     K.U.  No.  8332,  Lawrence  Co.,  Arkan- 

sas. A.  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head 
length,  11.5  mm.;  width,  11.5  mm 200 

26.  Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus).     A.M.N.H.  No.  1596,  "Western   Mex- 

ico."    A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head 205 

27.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus) 205 

28.  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider).     Field  Mus.  No.  853,  Enterprise,  Florida. 

A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
about  25  mm.;  width,  about  26  mm 215 

29.  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider).     K.U.  No.  7809,  Imboden,  Lawrence  Co., 

Arkansas.  Female.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  length,  17  mm.;  width,  18  mm 218 

30.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider) 221 

31.  Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor.     K.U.  No.  8232  (type),  Citrus  Co.,  Florida. 

A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
13.2  mm.;  width,  12  mm 226 

32.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor 232 

33.  Eumeces  xanthi  Gunther.     Field  Mus.  No.  7396,  Hsien-Lung,  Shan  dis- 

trict, Chihli,  China.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  length,  10  mm.;  width,  8  mm 242 

34.  Eumeces  elegans  Boulenger.     Field  Mus.  No.  7327,  Ningkwo,  Anhwei, 

China.  Male.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  12.4  mm.;  width,  11  mm 248 

35.  Distribution  of  the  continental  Asiatic  species  of  the  Fasciatus  group. . .  252 

36.  Eumeces   oshimensis   Thompson.     U.S.N. M.    No.    64210    (C.A.S.    No. 

21547),  Amamioshima,  Loo  Choo  Islands,  Japan.  A,  lateral  view 
of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length,  14  mm.; 
width,  12  mm 256 

37.  Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson.     C.A.S.  No.  21554,  Amamioshima,  Loo 

Choo  Islands,  Japan.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  length,  about  17.5  mm.;  width,  about  14.2  mm.,  258 

38.  Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson.     C.A.S.   No.   21670,   Ishigakijima.     A, 

lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.     Actual  head  length, 

10  mm. ;  width,  1 1  mm 261 

39.  Eumeces  latiscutatus  (Hallowed).     Stanford  U.  No.  5629,  Wakamura, 

Japan.     A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head 279 

40.  Distribution  of  the  island  species  of  the  Fasciatus  group 282 

41.  Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope.     K.U.  No.  7744,  topotype,  Helotes,  Tex. 

A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
9.4  mm. ;  width,  8.6  mm 285 


12  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued 
Figure  page 

42.  Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope.     E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.  276,  near  Sabinas 

Hidalgo,  Nuevo  Leon,  Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal 
view  of  head.     Actual  head  length,  9  mm. ;  width,  8  mm 288 

43.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope 289 

44.  Eumeces  callicephalus  Bocourt.     K.U.  No.  6474,  Ash  Canon,  Huachuca 

Mts.,  Arizona.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  10  mm. ;  width,  8.5  mm 292 

45.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  callicephalus  Bocourt 297 

46.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  tetragrammus  (Baird) 303 

47.  Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard).     K.U.  No.  7775,  Cameron  Co., 

Texas.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  16.5  mm.;  width,  14  mm 309 

48.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard) 317 

49.  Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  (Gray).     K.U.  No.  9095,  Foochow,  Fukien, 

China.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  21  mm. ;  width,  21  mm 323 

50.  Distribution  of  the  Asiatic  species  of  the  Obsoletus  group 327 

51.  Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron).     C.A.S.  No.  14662, 

Shanghai.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  approximately  11  mm.;  width,  about  10  mm 330 

52.  Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger.     After  Stejneger  (1907,  figs.  186,  187). 

Sci.  Coll.  Mus.  Tokyo,  No.  22;  Miyakoshima,  Sakisliima  group,  Riu 
Kiu  Islands,  Japan.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  width,  24  mm 335 

53.  Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger.     C.A.S.  No.  21724,  Ishigakijima,  Riu 

Kiu  Islands,  Japan.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  15  mm.;  width,  12  mm 336 

54.  Eumeces  multivirgatus  (Hallowell).     E.H.T.  Coll.;  Weld  Co.,  Colorado, 

Barry,  collector.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  about  9  mm. ;  width,  about  8  mm 345 

55.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  multivirgatus  (Hallowell)  and  Eumeces  gaigei 

Taylor 350 

56.  Eumeces  multivirgatus  (Hallowell).     U.S.N.M.  No.  30833,  Chihuahua, 

Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  10.2  mm. ;  width,  9.5  mm 353 

57.  Eumeces  gaigei  Taylor.     Mich.  U.  No.  70517,  Culberson  Co.,  Texas. 

A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
9.2  mm. ;  width,  7.8  mm 354 

58.  Eumeces  humilis  Boulenger.     K.U.  No.  13161,  Eddy  Co.,  New  Mexico. 

A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head 
length,  7.5  mm. ;  width,  6.0  mm 359 

59.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  humilis  Boulenger,  E.  parvulus  Taylor  and  E. 

parviauriculatus  Taylor 363 

60.  Eumeces  parvulus  Taylor.     U.S.N.M.  No.  56903,  type;  Tepic,  Nayarit, 

Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  9  mm. ;  width,  7  mm 365 

61.  Eumeces  parviauriculatus  Taylor.     U.S.N.M.  No.  47536,  type;  Alamos, 

Sonora.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  7  mm. ;  width,  6  mm 370 

62.  Eumeces  anthracinus  (Baird).     K.U.  No.  8221,  Imboden,  Ark.     A,  lat- 

eral view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
10.2  mm. ;  width,  9  mm 375 

63.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  anthracinus  (Baird) 385 

64.  Eumeces  copei  Taylor.     E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.  1827,  near  Tres  Marias, 

Morelos,  Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  10.2  mm.;  width,  8.3  mm 389 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  13 

LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued 
Figure  pagi 

65.  Distribution  of  Eumea  s  copei  Taylor 393 

66.  Eumeces  septentrionalis  sept*  ntrionalis  (Baird).     K.TT.  No.  6988,  5  miles 

west  of  Onaga,  Kan.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  length,  10.6  nun.;  width,  10.2  nun 397 

67.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  septentrionalis  septentrionalis  (Baird)  and  E.  s. 

obtusirostris  (Bocourt) 403 

68.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  skiltonianus  skiltonianus  (Baird  and  Girard), 

and  Eumeces  s.  brevipes  Cope 425 

69.  Eumeces    lagunensis  Van    Denburgh.     U.  of  C.  No.  13760,  Comondii, 

1,000  ft.,  Baja  California.     A.  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view 

of  head.     Actual  head  length,  7.3  mm.;  width,  6.5  mm 434 

70.  Distribution  of  Eumeo  s  lagunensis  Van  Denburgh 437 

71.  Eumeces  gilherti  gilberti  Van  Denburgh.     U.  of  C.  No.  12611,  east  of 

( looperstown,  on  county  line  between  Stanislaus  and  Tuolumne  Cos. 
A.  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
about  16  mm.;  width,  about  15  mm 440 

72.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  gilberti  gilberti  Van  Denburgh  and  E.  g.  rubri- 

caudatus  subsp.  nov 445 

73.  Eumeces  gilberti  rubricaud'itus  subsp. nov.  Cal.  TJ.  No.  560,  Old  Fort  Tejon, 

Kern  Co.  A;  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head  (parietal 
region  drawn  more  elongate  than  actual).  Actual  head  length,  13.2 
mm. ;  width,  10.8  mm 448 

74.  Eumeces  quadrilineatus  (Blyth).      A.M.N.H.  No.  30197,  South  moun- 

tains. Nodoa,  Hainan.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  length,  14  mm.;  width,  12  mm 454 

75.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  quadrilineatus  (Blyth) 456 

7ti.    Distribution  of  the  species  of  the  Brevirostris  group 458 

77.  Eumeces  brevirostris   (Gunther).     A.M.N.H.   No.    19270,    Oaxaca.     A, 

lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
7.6  mm. ;  width,  7  mm 464 

78.  Eumeces  indubitus  Taylor.     E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.  1727.     (1)  Lateral 

view  of  head;  (2)  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length,  10  mm. 
(Certain  differences  in  scalation  from  the  type  shown.) 468 

79.  Eumeces  dugesii  Thominot.     Stanford  U.  No.  3842,  Michoac&n,  Mexico. 

A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head 
length,  6.5  mm.;  width,  5.5  mm 474 

80.  Eumeces  colimensis  Taylor.     F.M.N.H.  No.  1649,  type,  Colima,  Colima, 

Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  10.7  mm.;  width,  9.7  mm.  (Courtesy,  Field  Museum 
of  Natural  History) 479 

81.  Eumeces  dicei  Ruthven  and  Gaige.     Mich.  U.  No.  69253,  Marmolejo, 

Tamaulipas,  Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  length,  6.5  mm.;  width,  5.5  mm 483 

82.  Eumeces  ochoterenae  Taylor.     E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.   1015,  type.     A, 

lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length, 
7.4  mm. ;  width,  6  mm 487 

83.  Eumeces  egregius  egregius    (Baird).     U.S.N.M.   No.   61692,    Big   Pine 

Key,  Florida.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  7.2  mm.;  width,  6  mm 492 

84.  Distribution  of  Eumeces  egregius  egregius  (Baird)  and  E.  e.  onocrepis 

<  ope) 501 


14  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

PLATES 

LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued 
Plate  page 

1.  Eumeces  schwartzei  Fischer.     Mich.  U.  No.  68226,  Chichen-Itza,  Yuca- 

tan; snout  to  vent,  112  mm 545 

2.  Eumeces  altamirani   Duges.     Fig.    1,   after   Duges    (1891),    pi.   XXII, 

(p.  547).  Eumeces  managuae  Dunn.  Fig.  2,  British  Mus.  No. 
53,  8,  17,  6;  snout  to  vent,  116  mm.     (Eumeces  taeniolatus  Boul.) . . .  547 

3.  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth).     Figs.  1  and  2,  British  Mus.  No.  70,  11, 

29,  9.  Alpine  Punjab  on  the  route  from  Jhelum  into  Kashmir. 
Photograph  by  British  Museum  of  Natural  History,  (p.  549). 
Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald) .     Fig.  3,  K.U.  No.  11020,  Transcaspia,  549 

4.  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth).     E.H.T.  No.  4888,  Puli  Hatun,   Trans- 

caspia; snout  to  vent,  98.2  mm 551 

5.  Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin).     Fig.  1,  E.H.T.  No.  6521,  Haiffa,  Syria; 

snout  to  vent,  160  mm.  Eumeces  pavimentatus  (Geoffroy-St.  Hil- 
laire).     Fig.  2,  K.U.  No.  11021,  Haiffa,  Syria 553 

6.  Eumeces  blythianus   (Anderson).     British  Mus.   No.   98.7.12.1,   Afridi 

Country,  Afghan  borderland.  Photograph  by  the  Brit.  Mus.  Nat. 
Hist 555 

7.  Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters).     After  Boulenger,  Trans.  Zool. 

Soc.  London,  XIII,  pi.  16,  Mogodor,  Morocco.     (Reduced.) 557 

8.  Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin).     Fig.  1,  U.S.N.M.  No.  10946,  Algeria; 

snout  to  vent,  155  mm.  (p.  559).  Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis 
(Peters).  Fig.  2,  K.U.  No.  11019,  Casablanca,  Morocco;  snout  to 
vent,  173  mm.  (p.  559).  Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters). 
Fig.  3,  U.S.N.M.  No.  37290,  Oran,  W.  Algeria;  snout  to  vent, 
180  mm 559 

9.  Eumeces  longirostris   (Cope).     Fig.   1,  K.U.  No.  8215,  Castle  Island, 

Bermuda  Islands;  snout  to  vent,  60  mm.  Fig.  2,  K.U.  No.  8216, 
Castle  Island;  snout  to  vent,  79  mm.;  adult  male.  Fig.  3,  K.U. 
No.  7280,  Castle  Island,  Bermuda;  snout  to  vent,  72  mm 561 

10.  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope).    Figs.  1  and  2,  B.M.N.H.  No.  81,10,31,30; 

Jalapa,  Vera  Cruz,  Mexico;  about  natural  size.  Fig.  3,  Para- 
type,  "Eumeces  schmidti"  Dunn;  F.M.N.H.  No.  18004,  Lancetilla, 
Honduras;  snout  to  vent,  64  mm 563 

11.  Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus).     Fig.  1,  K.  U.  No.  11359;  adult  male; 

Imboden,  Arkansas;  about  natural  size.  Fig.  2,  K.U.  No.  11355; 
Imboden,  Arkansas;  natural  size;  transitional  coloration.  Fig.  3, 
K.U.  No.  11352,  Imboden,  Arkansas;  actual  size 565 

12.  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider).    Fig.  1,  Mich.  U.  No.  67792,  Pigeon  River, 

Butte  Co.,  Alabama;  adult  female;  snout  to  vent,  93  mm.  Fig.  2, 
Mich.  U.  No.  67793,  Houston  Co.,  Georgia;  adult  female;  snout 
to  vent,  87  mm 567 

13.  Eumeces   laticeps    (Schneider).     Fig.  1,  Mich.  U.  No.  57717,  Micanopy 

Road,  Florida;  snout  to  vent,  54  mm.;  seven-lined  form.  Fig.  2, 
Mich.  U.  No.  56607,  Alachua  Co.,  Florida;  adult  female  with  four- 
teen undeveloped  eggs;  snout  to  vent,  95  mm.;  seven-lined  form. 
Fig.  3,  Mich.  U.  No.  56686,  Hanover,  Indiana;  snout  to  vent,  84 
mm.;  five-lined  form.  Fig.  4,  Okla.  U.  No.  7265;  Delaware  Co., 
Oklahoma;  adult  male;  snout  to  vent,  112  mm.;  five-lined  form 569 

14.  Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor.     Fig.  1,  Mich.  U.  No.  61629,   Gulf  port, 

Pinelas  Co.,  Florida;  female;  snout  to  vent,  67  mm.;  actual  size. 
Fig.  2,  same,  dorsal  view.  Fig.  3,  Mich.  U.  No.  61631,  Hillsboro  Co.. 
Florida;  snout  to  vent,  50  mm.;  actual  size.  Fig.  4,  K.U.  No.  8232, 
Citrus  Co.,  Florida,  type;  snout  to  vent,  66  mm.  Fig.  5,  K.U.  No. 
8233;  paratype;  Citrus  Co.,  Florida;  snout  to  vent,  62  mm 571 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  15 

LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued 
Platb  page 

15.  Eumeces  xanthi  Giinther.     British    Museum  No.  89,  6,  25,  4.     Ichang, 

China.  Figs.  1,  2,  3,  cotypes,  about  natural  size.  Photographs  by 
Brit ish  Museum 573 

16.  Eumeces  elegans  Boulenger.     Fig.  1,  C.A.S.  No.  31402,  snout  to  vent, 

69  nun.  Fig.  2,  C.A.S.  No.  31399  (the  head  scales  of  this  specimen 
are  shown  in  Text,  Fig.  4,  A  and  B).  Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No.  26762, 
snout  to  vent,  89  mm.     All  from  Mo  Kan  Shan,  China 575 

17.  Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson.     Fig.  1,  C.A.S.  No.  21658;  snout  to  vent, 

63mm.  Fig.  2,  C.A.S.  No.  21659;  snout  to  vent,  55  mm.  Fig.  3, 
C.A.S.  No.  21670;  snout  to  vent,  60  mm.  Fig.  4,  C.A.S.  No.  21648; 
snout  to  vent,  53  mm.     All  from  Ishigakijima 577 

18.  Eumeces  marginatus  (Hallowell).     Fig.  1,  C.A.S.  No.  24252;  snout  to 

vent,   53  nun.;   male.     Fig.   2,   C.A.S.   No.   24254;  snout  to   vent, 

70  nun.:  male.  Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No.  24251;  snout  to  vent,  72  mm.; 
male.     All  from  Nago,  Okinawa 579 

19.  Eumeces  okadae  (Stejneger).     Fig.   1,  U.S.N.M.  No.  23895;  snout  to 

vent,  79  mm.;  female.  Fig.  2,  U.S.N.M.  No.  23896;  snout  to  vent, 
41  mm.;  young.  Both  from  Niishima,  Idzu  Islands,  Japan  (p.  000). 
Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson.  Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No.  21595;  Amami- 
oshima,  Riu  Kiu  Islands;  51  mm 581 

20.  Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson.     Fig.   1,   C.A.S.  No.  21634,  Kike'ia, 

Riu  Kiu   Islands.     Snout  to  vent,   65.5  mm.     Fig.   2,   C.A.S.  i 
21626,  Kikaiga,   Riu  Kiu  Islands;  82.5  mm.     Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No. 
21613,  Amamioshima,  Riu  Kiu  Islands;  66  mm.     Fig.  4,  C.A.S.  No. 
21565,  Amamioshima,  Riu  Kiu  Islands;  78  mm.     Fig.  5,  C.A.S.  No. 
•_' 1!'>33,  Ivikaiga,  Riu  Kiu  Islands;  53  mm 583 

21.  Eumeces  latiscutatus    (Hallowell).     Fig.    1,    C.A.S.    No.   33028,    Kobe, 

Japan;  snout  to  vent,  72.5  mm.  Fig.  2,  C.A.S.  No.  33048,  Miyazo, 
Japan;  74.5  mm.     Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No.  33049,  Miyazo,  Japan;  72  mm.,  585 

22.  Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope.     Fig.  1,  K.U.  No.  7769,  Helotes,  Bexar  Co., 

Texas;  snout  to  vent,  51  mm.  Fig.  2,  K.U.  No.  13199,  Glass  Mts., 
Brewster  Co.,  Texas;  snout  to  vent,  49  mm.  Fig.  3,  K.U.  No.  13200, 
Chisos  Mts.,  Brewster  Co.,  Texas;  snout  to  vent,  58  mm.  Fig.  4, 
K.U.  No.  7768,  Alpine,  Brewster  Co.,  Texas;  snout  to  vent,  59  mm.,  587 

23.  Eumeces  callicephalus  Bocourt.     Figs.   1  and  2,  Harvard  No.   15928, 

Chihuahua;  snout  to  vent,  57  mm.  Figs.  3  and  4,  C.A.S.  No. 
48095,  Huachuca  Mts.,  Arizona;  snout  to  vent,  52.2  mm 589 

21.  Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard).  Fig.  1,  E.H.T.  Collection, 
Lawrence,  Kansas;  snout  to  vent,  94  mm.  Fig.  2,*K.U.  No.  7775, 
Cameron  Co.,  Texas;  snout  to  vent,  90  mm.  Fig.  3,  E.H.T.  Col- 
lection, Lawrence,  Kansas;  snout  to  vent,  97  mm 591 

25.  Fig.   1,  Eumeces  chinettsis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron).     C.A.S.  No. 

1  1662,  Shanghai,  China,  (p.  593).  Fig.  2,  Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis 
(Gray).  Mich.  U.  No.  65028,  Moh  Kan  Shan,  China;  snout  to  vent, 
92  mm.  (p.  593).  Fig.  3,  Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  (Gray). 
C.A.S.  No.  18603,  Keelung,  Formosa 593 

26.  Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger.     Fig.  1,  C.A.S.  No.  21724,  Ishigakijima. 

Riu  Kiu  Islands,  Japan;  snout  to  vent,  80  mm.  Fig.  2,  C.A.S.  No. 
21722,  Miyakojima,  Riu  Kiu  Islands,  Japan;  snout  to  vent,  134  mm. 
Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No.  21725,  Ishigakijima,  Riu  Kiu  Islands,  Japan; 
snout  to  vent,  137.5  mm 595 

27.  Eumeces  multivirgatus  (Hallowell..  Fig.  1,  Denver  Mus.  No.  6;  snout 

to  vent,  60  mm.    Fig.  2,  D.M.  No.  3;  snout  to  vent,  57  mm.     Fig.  3, 

D. M. No.  8;  snout  to  vent,  63  mm.     All  from  Weld  Co.,  Colorado.  .    597 

28.  Eumeces  septentrionalis  obtusirostris  (Bocourt).     Fig.  1,  K.U.  No.  13158, 

Waco,  McLennan  Co..  Texas;  snout  to  vent.  63  mm.     Fig.  2,  K.U. 


16  The  University  Science  Bulletin 


LIST  OF  ILLUSTRATIONS— Continued 


Plate 


No.  13159,  same  locality;  snout  to  vent,  45  mm.  (p.  599).  Eumeces 
multivirgatus  (Hallowell)  (p.  599).  Fig.  3,  U.S.N.M.  No.  30833, 
Chihuahua;  snout  to  vent,  69  mm.  Fig.  4,  Collection  Grand  Canyon 
Nat.  Park,  from  Grand  Canyon;  snout  to  vent,  35  mm 599 

29.  (Not  printed.) 

30.  Eumeces  humilis  Boulenger.     Figs.  1  and  2,  K.U.  No.  13161,  Carlsbad 

Caverns,  Eddy  Co.,  New  Mexico;  snout  to  vent,  47  mm.  Fig.  3, 
Mich.  U.  No.  70516,  Guadalupe  Mts.,  Culberson  Co.,  Texas;  snout 
to  vent,  65  mm 601 

31.  Eumeces  egregius  onocrepis  (Cope).     Fig.  1,  U.S.N.M.  No.  60515,  Au- 

burndale,  Pope  Co.,  Florida;  snout  to  vent,  54  mm.  (p.  603).  Eumeces 
egregius  egregius  (Baird).  Fig.  2,  U.S.N.M.  No.  61692,  Big  Pine 
Key,  Florida;  snout  to  vent,  46  mm.  (p.  603).  Eumeces  parvulus 
Taylor.  Fig.  3,  U.S.N.M.  No.  51395,  Miniman,  Nayarit;  paratype; 
snout  to  vent,  37  mm.  Fig.  4,  U.S.N.M.  No.  56903,  Tepic,  Nayarit; 
type;  snout  to  vent,  51  mm.  (p.  603).  Eumeces  parviauriculatus 
Taylor.  Fig.  5,  U.S.N.M.  No.  47536,  Alamos,  Sonora;  type;  snout 
to  vent,  47  mm 603 

32.  Eumeces  anthracinus  (Baird).     Fig.  1,  K.U.  No.  11342,  Cherokee  Co., 

Kansas.  Fig.  2,  K.U.  No.  8219,  Lawrence  Co.,  Arkansas.  Fig.  3, 
K.U.  No.  8221,  Lawrence  Co.,  Arkansas.  Snout  to  vent,  all  speci- 
mens, 56  mm.  Fig.  4,  K.U.  No.  11339  Galena,  Kansas,  x-1.  Fig. 
5,  K.U.  No.  11340,  Galena,  Kansas,  x-1 605 

33.  Eumeces  copei  Taylor.     Fig.  1,  U.S.N.M.  No.  32291;  "Either  the  valley 

of  Mexico  or  the  neighboring  one  of  Toluca";  snout  to  vent,  70  mm. 
Fig.  2,  E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.  3865;  10  miles  southeast  of  Asuncion, 
western  Mexico,  Mexico;  snout  to  vent,  62  mm.  Fig.  3,  E.H.T.  & 
H.M.S.  No.  3859;  same  locality;  snout  to  vent,  76  mm 607 

34.  Eumeces  septeiitrionalis  septentrionalis  (Baird).     Fig.  1,  K.U.  No.  6982; 

snout  to  vent,  74  mm.  Fig.  2,  K.U.  No.  6979;  snout  to  vent,  65  mm. 
Fig.  3,  K.U.  No.  6991;  snout  to  vent,  68  mm.  All  specimens  from 
Onaga,  Kan 609 

35.  Eumeces  skiltonianus  skiltonianus  (Baird  and  Girard).     Fig.  1,  C.A.S. 

No.  48923,  Carmel,  Monterey  Co.;  snout  to  vent,  40  mm.  Fig.  2, 
Idem.  Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No.  39330,  Comptche,  Mendocino  Co.;  snout 
to  vent,  65  mm.  Fig.  4,  C.A.S.  No.  26986,  Carmel,  Monterey  Co.; 
snout  to  vent,  67  mm 611 

36.  Fig.  1,  Eumeces  lagunensis  Van  Denburgh.     U.  of  C.  No.  13760,  Com- 

ondii,  1,000  ft.,  Baja  California,  Mexico;  snout  to  vent,  50  mm. 
(p.  613).  Fig.  2,  Eumeces  skiltonianus  skiltonianus  (Baird  and 
Girard).  Cal.  U.  No.  10487,  Todos  Santos  Islands;  snout  to  vent, 
65  mm.;  typical  specimen.  Fig.  3,  Eumeces  skiltonianus  skiltonianus 
(Baird  and  Girard).  C.A.S.  No.  13736  (male),  Carmel,  Monterey 
Co.;  snout  to  vent,  65  mm.;  specimens  of  this  type  were  found  with 
the  typical  ones.  Fig.  4,  Eumeces  skiltonianus  skiltonianus  (Baird 
and  Girard).  Cal.  U.  No.  10950,  Turner's  Lyonsville,  3,500  ft., 
Tehama  Co.;  snout  to  vent,  61  mm.;  a  single  atypical  specimen  ob- 
tained from  a  large  series 613 

37.  Eumeces  gilberti  gilberti  Van  Denburgh.     Fig.  1,  C.A.S.  No.  65307,  Pan- 

amint  Mts.,  Inyo  Co.;  snout  to  vent,  75  mm.  Fig.  2,  Cal.  U., 
Yosemite  Valley,  Mariposa  Co.  Fig.  3,  C.A.S.  No.  50158,  Yo- 
semite  Valley,  Mariposa  Co.;  snout  to  vent,  96  mm 615 

38.  Eumeces  gilberti  gilberti  Van  Denburgh.     Fig.  1,  Stanford  U.  No.  3421, 

San  Joaquin  Co.;  approximately  natural  size.  Fig.  2,  Stanford  U. 
No.  3422,  San  Joaquin  Co.;  approximately  natural  size.  Fig.  3, 
Cal.  U.  Mus.  Zool.  No.  3985,  Carbondale,  Amador  Co.;  snout  to 
vent,  89  mm.  Fig.  4,  Cal.  U.  Mus.  Zool.  No.  3559,  San  Joaquin  Co.; 
snout  to  vent,  98  mm 617 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  17 

LIST  OF   II. I. TITRATIONS—  Concluded 
Pi  mi  page 

39.  Eumeces  gHherti  rubricaudatus  Taylor.     Fig.  1,  C.A.S.  No.  39001,  Te- 

hachapi  Mts.,  Kern  Co.;  snout  to  vent,  51  mm.  Fig.  2,  C.A.S. 
No.  35363,  Witch  Creek,  San  Diego  Co.;  snout  to  vent,  39.5  mm. 
Fig.  3,  Cal.  U.  No.  5560,  near  Fort  Tejon,  Kern  Co.;  snout  to  vent, 
s7  mm.  Fig.  4,  C.A.S.  No.  40301  (male).  Campo,  San  Diego  Co.; 
snout  to  vent,  101  mm 619 

40.  Eumeces  quadrilineatus  (Blyth).     Fig.  1,  A.M.N.H.  No.  30197;  male; 

South  Mountains,  Nodoa,  Hainan;  snout  to  vent,  73  mm.  (p.  621). 
Emmas  h/njr  lynxe  Wiegmann.  Fig.  2,  Mich.  U.  No.  48066;  fe- 
male: Guerrero,  Hidalgo,  Mexico;  snout  to  vent,  67  mm.  (p.  621). 
Eumeces  colimensis  Taylor.  Fig.  3,  F.M.N.H.  No.  1649;  type,  fe- 
male, Colima,  Mexico;  snout  to  vent,  65  mm.  (p.  621).  Eumeces 
lynxe  lynxe  Wiegmann.  Fig.  4,  F.S.N.M.  No.  14605,  female;  snout 
to  vent,  i»2  mm 621 

41.  Eumeces  brevirostris   (Giinther).     Fig.  1,  E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.   No.  2587. 

Fig.  2,  E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.  2571.  Totalco,  Vera  Cruz;  snout  to 
vent,  both  specimens,  54  mm.  Fig.  3,  U.S.N. M.  Xo.  46682,  La 
Parada,  Oaxaca;  64  mm 623 

42.  Eumeces  indubious  Taylor.     Fig.  A,  E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.  1674  para- 

type;  40  miles  south  of  Mexico  City;  about  actual  size.  Fig.  B, 
E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  No.  1731;  type;  same  locality;  about  actual  size,  625 

43.  Eumeces  ochoterenae  Taylor.     Fig.  1,  E.H.T.  &  H.M.S.  Xo.  1481.  Ma- 

zatlan,  Guerrero,  Mexico;  snout  to  vent,  53  mm.  Fig.  2,  E.H.T.  & 
H.M.S.  No.  1015,  same  locality;  56  mm.  (p.  627).  Eumeces  dugesii 
Thominot.  Fig.  3,  U.S.N.M.  Xo.  26153,  Guanajuato.  Mexico; 
snout  to  vent,  58.6  mm.  Fig.  4,  U.S.N.M.  Xo.  26154,  Guanajuato, 
Mexico;  snout  to  vent,  67  mm t>27 


2—1123 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  KANSAS 

SGIENGE  BULLETIN 

Vol.  XXIII.]  July  15,  1935  [No.  1. 


A  Taxonomic  Study  of  the  Cosmopolitan  Scincoid 
Lizards  of  the  Genus  Eumeces 

With  an  Account  of  the  Distribution  and  Relationship- 

of  Its  Species 


Abstract:  This  paper  is  a  monographic  revision  of  the  genus  Eumeces 
Wiegmann,  based  for  the  most  part  on  the  collections  to  be  found  in  the 
United  States.  All  species  and  subspecies  have  been  redescribed  and  data  on 
variation  have  been  recorded.  The  measurements  of  a  series  of  specimens  of 
each  form  have  been  given.  Practically  all  species  have  been  figured  either  by 
line  drawings  or  photographs.  A  more  or  less  complete  list  of  localities  where 
specimens  have  been  taken  is  given,  as  well  as  maps  showing  the  present  known 
distribution. 

Xumerous  nomenclatorial  changes  have  been  made  from  those  commonly 
accepted. 

Compared  with  the  "Checklist  of  North  American  Amphibians  and  Reptiles" 
Stejneger  and  Barbour,  3d  ed.,  1933,  the  following  names  are  added,  omitted 
or  changed. 

Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider). 

Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor. 

Eumeces  egregius  egregius  (Baird). 

Eumeces  egregius  onocrepis  (Cope) . 

Eumeces  septentrionalis  septentrionalis  (Baird). 

Eumeces  septentrionalis  obtusirostris  (Bocourt)  (formerly  Eumeces 
pachyurus  Cope). 

Eumeces  gilberti  gilberti  Van  Denburgh. 

Eumeces  gilberti  rubricaudatus  subsp.  nov. 

Eumeces  skiltonianus  brevipes  Cope. 

Eumeces  gaigei  Taylor. 

Eumeces  pluvialis  Cope  placed  in  the  synonymy  of  Eumeces 
anthracinus  (Baird). 

Compared  with  Boulenger's  Catalogue  of  the  Lizards  of  the  British  Museum, 
vol.  Ill,  1887,  the  following  changes,  additions  or  omissions  occur  in  forms 

(19) 


20  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

found  outside  the  United  States.     (This  Catalogue,  is  the  only  complete  treat- 
ment of  the  group.) 

Eumeces  latiscutatus  (Hallowell). 

Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  (Gray). 

Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron). 

Eumeces  bellii  (Gray)  (placed  in  synonymy  of  Eumeces  lynxe  lynxe 

(Wiegmann) . 
Eumeces  lynxe  lynxe  (Wiegmann). 
Eumeces  lynxe  furcirostris  (Cope). 
Eumeces  dugesii  Thominot. 
Eumeces  parviauriculatus  Taylor. 
Eumeces  parvulus  Taylor. 
Eumeces  colimensis  Taylor. 
Eumeces  indubitus  Taylor. 
Eumeces  ochotercnae  Taylor. 
Eumeces  altamirani  Duges. 
Eumeces  managuae  Dunn. 
Eumeces  taeniolatus  Boulenger  referred  to  the  synonymy  of 

Eumeces  managuae  Dunn. 
Eumeces  scutatus  Theobald  referred  to  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth). 
Eumeces  pavimentatus  (Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire). 
Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald). 
Eumeces  zarudnyi  Nikolsky. 
Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters). 
Eumeces  algeriensis  meridionalis  Domergue. 
Eumeces  chinensis  formosanus  Van  Denburgh  referred  to  the  synonymy 

of  Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  (Gray). 
Eumeces  xanlhi  Giinther. 
Eumeces  pekinensis  Stejneger  referred  to  the  synonymy  of 

Eumeces  xanthi  Giinther. 
Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger. 
Eumeces  okadae  (Stejneger). 
Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson. 
Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson. 
Eumeces  barbouri  Van  Denburgh. 
Eumeces  marginatum  kikaigensis  Van  Denburgh  and  Eumeces  marginatum 

amamiensis  Van  Denburgh  are  placed  in  the  synonymy  of  Eumect  s 

oshimensis  Thompson. 
Eumeces  ishigakiensis  Van  Denburgh  is  placed  in  the  synonymy  of 

Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eimeces  21 

INTRODUCTION 

In  attempting  a  taxonomic  revision  of  this  puzzling  genus 
Eumeces,  I  have  had  as  a  goal  the  proper  definition  of  the  genus 

and  of  its  known  forms;  the  description  of  new  and  unrecognized 
forms;  the  resurrection  of  species  long  buried  in  synonymies;  the 
disentanglement  of  certain  taxonomic  knots;  and  in  a  measure  the 
bringing  about  of  more  adequate  facilities  for  the  recognition  or 
determination  of  species  by  means  of  more  complete  description- 
and  use  of  more  adequate  illustration^ 

I  have  also  attempted  to  arrive  at  the  most  probable  derivation 
and  relationships  of  the  genus  and  its  species,  and  so  far  as  my 
data  go  to  plot  their  present  known  distribution. 

The  task  involving  the  revision  of  a  genus  places  a  very  con- 
siderable responsibility  upon  the  reviewer.  Particularly  is  there  a 
responsibility  as  regards  his  interpretation  of  forms  with  relation  to 
taxonomy.  Shall  this  form  be  made  subspecific?  Shall  this  be 
recognized  as  a  species?  Shall  this  variety  even  be  recognized  with 
a  name?  Or,  on  the  other  hand,  shall  this  form  now  recognized  be 
relegated  to  oblivion  in  the  synonymy? 

"Lumping"  is  the  lazy  method  of  treatment  and  probably  does 
more  to  obscure  true  relationships  and  the  consequent  bearing  on 
the  evolutionary  history  of  a  group  than  anything  else  a  reviewer 
might  do.  Excessive  zeal  in  "splitting"  and  thus  multiplying  named 
forms,  rather  than  reducing  them,  may  likewise  defeat  the  desired 
end.  The  supreme  difficulty  is  the  maintenance  of  a  consistent 
attitude.  A  question  arises  concerning  two  forms  occupying  ad- 
jacent territory:  are  they  species  or  subspecies?  "With  a  consider- 
able number  of  characters  which  tend  to  but  do  not  definitely  sepa- 
rate the  forms,  it  might  appear  wise  to  regard  them  as  subspecies. 
If,  on  the  other  hand,  only  a  single  specimen  or  a  very  occasional 
one  shows  a  tendency  to  merge  certain  characters,  it  seems  unwise  to 
so  regard  them.  When  two  forms  are  able  to  maintain  their  identity 
throughout  a  considerable  area  common  to  both,  one  should  regard 
them  as  species  despite  an  occasional  specimen  which  seems  to  com- 
bine characters  of  both,  for  in  this  case  it  may  be  adaptive  re- 
semblance due  to  the  same  environment.  An  occasional  cross  be- 
tween species  does  not  necessarily  imply  close  I  -ubspeeific)  relation- 
ship. We  are  aware  of  crosses  occurring  between  very  distinct 
species  or  even  genera  which  might  show  mixed  characters  of  the 
two  forms.     One  can  conceive  such  crosses  in  which  certain  dif- 


22  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

ferential  specific  characters  are  of  such  a  nature  as  to  behave  as 
Mendelian  characters  in  inheritance,  and  in  a  single  brood  of  the 
second  generation,  one  might  have  typical  specimens  of  each  species 
from  a  single  mother. 

In  this  work,  where  there  seems  to  be  doubt  due  to  an  insufficiency 
of  material,  I  have  usually  retained  forms  under  subspecific  names, 
especially  where  their  ranges  are  contiguous  and  have  definitive 
characters  of  size,  color  or  squamation  which  permit  identification 
of  the  adult. 

In  some  forms,  notably  Eumeces  obsoletus,  the  specimens  from 
north  to  south  vary  so  gradually  that  it  seems  necessary  to  retain 
the  variants  under  a  single  specific  name.  In  the  case  of  Eumeces 
brevirostris,  Eumeces  skiltonianus  and  certain  others,  I  have  placed 
a  number  of  variant  forms  under  a  single  name,  due  to  too  great 
an  insufficiency  of  material  to  positively  limit  and  define  these 
variants  as  either  species  or  subspecies.  Throughout  the  work  I 
have  endeavored  to  maintain  a  consistent  attitude,  but  uncon- 
sciously consistency  may  have  been  violated. 

In  attempting  to  determine  relationships  I  have  found  many 
difficulties  in  the  way  of  arriving  at  unassailable  conclusions.  No 
single  set  of  criteria  will  suffice,  and  one  may  claim  that  relation- 
ships exist  between  certain  forms  because  of  certain  scale  and  color 
pattern  similarities;  in  another  case  one  will  feel  constrained  to 
postulate  relationship  in  spite  of  great  dissimilarity  in  color  pat- 
tern and  scale  formula ;  or,  in  still  another,  to  separate  widely  forms 
that  agree  in  certain  scale  or  color  characters.  Here  again,  perhaps, 
consistency  has  been  violated. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

In  the  preparation  of  this  work,  numerous  institutions  and  in- 
dividuals have  assisted  by  the  loan  of  specimens,  material,  books  or 
information,  without  which  the  task  would  have  been  impossible. 
I  wish  to  offer  grateful  acknowledgment  to  Dr.  Leonhard  Stejneger, 
Dr.  Doris  Cochran  and  other  authorities  of  the  United  States 
National  Museum  for  the  loan  of  their  extensive  collection,  for 
placing  at  my  disposal  their  libraries  and  space  for  work  while  at 
the  museum,  and  for  the  privilege  of  describing  new  forms;  to 
Dr.  Joseph  Grinnell  and  Dr.  Jean  Linsdale,  of  the  Museum  of 
Vertebrate  Zoology  at  the  University  of  California,  for  the  loan  of 
the  collections  in  their  charge;  to  Dr.  Albert  W.  Herre,  of  the 
Stanford  University  Museum,  for  the  loan  of  the  museum  collection; 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  23 

to  Mr.  Joseph  Slevin,  for  the  loan  of  the  collection  in  the  California 
Academy  of  Science-;  to  Mr.  L.  M.  Klauber,  of  San  Diego,  Cal.,  for 
the  loan  of  his  private  collection  and  that  of  the  Zoological  Society 
(if  San  Diego,  and  for  numerous  specimens  presented  to  me;  to  Dr. 
Thomas  Barbour,  director  of  the  Harvard  Museum  of  Comparative 
Zoology,  and  Mr.  Loveridge,  for  the  loan  of  specimens  and  the 
privilege  of  studying  others  in  that  museum;  to  Dr.  G.  K.  Noble  and 
Mr.  Clifford  Pope,  for  the  loan  of  specimens  and  the  privilege  of 
studying  material  in  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History;  to 
Dr.  Karl  Schmidt,  of  the  Field  Museum  of  Natural  History,  for  the 
loan  of  the  collections  in  that  institution  and  the  privilege  of  describ- 
ing new  species;  to  Mrs.  Helen  T.  Gaige,  for  the  loan  of  the  large 
collections  of  the  Museum  of  Zoology  of  the  University  of  Michigan, 
and  for  many  other  courtesies  and  much  assistance;  to  Mr.  Charles 
M.  B.  Cadwalader  and  Mr.  Henry  W.  Fowler,  of  the  Academy  of 
Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia,  for  the  privilege  of  studying  speci- 
mens in  the  collection  of  that  institution;  to  Mr.  Graham  Netting, 
of  the  Carnegie  Museum  of  Pittsburgh,  for  the  loan  of  specimens; 
to  Mr.  Charles  Bunker,  of  the  Kansas  Museum,  for  the  privilege 
of  studying  the  extensive  collection  in  his  charge  and  for  innumer- 
able courtesies  in  connection  with  my  work;  to  Dr.  I.  A.  Orten- 
berger,  for  the  loan  of  the  collection  in  the  University  of  Oklahoma ; 
to  Mr.  Roger  Conant,  for  the  loan  of  specimens  in  the  Toledo 
Zoological  Society;  to  Mr.  Charles  F.  Walker,  for  the  loan  of  speci- 
mens in  the  Ohio  State  Museum;  to  Dr.  S.  C.  Bishop,  for  the  loan 
of  specimens  in  the  University  of  Rochester;  to  Dr.  Isaac  Ocho- 
terena,  director  of  the  Instituto  de  Biologia  in  Mexico  City,  Mexico, 
for  assistance  and  many  courtesies  while  in  Mexico;  to  Dr.  Sokoloff 
and  Sr.  Rafael  Martin  del  Campo,  of  the  same  institution,  for  many 
courtesies  and  much  assistance;  to  my  students  in  herpetology  and 
friends  at  Kansas  University  who  have  furnished  help  and  assist- 
ance; to  Dr.  Charles  Burt  and  May  Danheim  Burt,  for  the  data 
taken  by  them  on  eastern  specimens,  for  the  loan  of  books,  and  for 
specimens;  to  Dr.  A.  H.  Wright  and  Dr.  W.  J.  Hamilton  for  the 
privilege  of  examining  the  specimens  in  the  Cornell  University 
collection. 

I  desire  also  to  express  my  heartiest  thanks  to  the  following  in- 
stitutions or  persons  who  have  likewise  been  of  assistance:  to 
Howard  K.  Gloyd,  of  the  University  of  Michigan,  for  transcribing 
literature  and  for  specimens;  to  H.  W.  Parker,  Esq.,  of  the  British 
Museum   of  Natural   History,  for  detailed  information  regarding 


24  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

numerous  specimens,  and  particularly  types  in  the  British  Museum 
of  Natural  History,  and  for  the  preparation  of  a  series  of  photo- 
graphs of  types  and  important  specimens  in  that  institution,  and  for 
exchange  of  specimens;  to  Dr.  Jean  Roux,  for  data  on  specimens  in 
the  Basle  Museum,  and  for  exchanges;  to  Dr.  Robert  Mertens,  of 
the  Senckenbergian  Museum,  Frankfort  am  Main,  for  data  and 
liberal  exchanges  of  African  and  Asiatic  forms;  to  Mr.  Albert  Kirn, 
of  Somerset,  Tex.,  for  specimens;  to  Dr.  M.  F.  Angel,  of  the  Museum 
National  d'Histoire  Naturelle  de  Paris,  for  his  kindness  in  examining 
a  type  specimen  in  that  institution  and  comments  on  the  same;  to 
Mr.  Lewis  T.  Barry,  of  the  Colorado  Museum  of  Natural  History, 
for  a  series  of  specimens  of  Eumeces  multivirgatus  from  Colorado; 
to  Dr.  Frank  N.  Blanchard  for  data;  to  Mr.  Lorenzo  H.  Cook,  of 
San  Diego,  for  specimens;  to  John  Suarez  Wright,  of  Santa  Barbara, 
Cal.,  for  specimens  and  assistance  in  collecting;  to  Bill  Lunceford, 
of  Flagstaff,  Ariz.,  for  assistance  in  collecting;  to  Hobart  Smith,  of 
Lawrence,  Kan.,  for  specimens  and  assistance  in  collecting  as  well 
as  help  in  typing  and  reading  the  manuscript ;  to  Mrs.  Grace  Wiley, 
of  the  Minneapolis  Public  Library  Museum,  for  loan  of  specimens; 
to  Dean  Wilson,  of  Ottawa  University,  for  the  loan  of  specimens 
in  that  institution;  to  Mr.  A.  F.  Carr,  of  the  University  of  Florida, 
for  the  privilege  of  examining  Florida  specimens ;  and  to  Dr.  Walter 
Williams,  for  the  loan  of  the  collections  at  Baylor  University. 

The  drawings  are  of  typical  specimens,  and  are  largely  the  work 
of  Mr.  Melvin  Douglas,  of  Lawrence,  Kan.  The  photographs  have 
been  made  almost  wholly  from  preserved  specimens  submerged  under 
water,  by  L.  M.  Peace  and  Oren  R,  Bingham,  of  Lawrence,  Kan. 

METHODS  AND  MATERIALS 

In  this  study  of  the  genus  Eumeces,  the  general  method  of 
treatment  is  that  followed  in  numerous  recent  monographic  works 
of  a  similar  sort,  save  that  space  has  forbidden  my  quoting  ex- 
tensively from  other  authors. 

I  have  endeavored  to  make  the  synonymies  complete,  but  I  am 
aware  that  this  has  been  done  only  in  a  measure,  and  that  doubt- 
less I  have  overlooked  important  papers.  Owing  to  lack  of  ade- 
quate library  facilities,  the  literature  was  transcribed  by  typing 
or  photostating  so  that,  save  for  certain  rare  works,  the  entire  litera- 
ture was  immediately  available.  Unfortunately,  in  the  literature 
of  the  Fasciatus  group,  and  again  in  that  of  the  Schneiderii  group, 
it  has  not  been  possible  to  relegate,  with  certainty  in  all  cases, 
each  species  reference  to  the  proper  synonymy,  owing  to  my  in- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  25 

ability  to  determine,  at  times,  what  species  was  being  treated  by  a 
particular  author.  The  descriptions  have  been  drawn  up  from  in- 
dividual specimens  in  rather  considerable  detail.  Many  species 
have  not  been  adequately  described  heretofore.  It  appears  obvious 
that  brevity  in  descriptions  contributes  more  to  taxonomic  confusion 
than  does  prolixity. 

In  the  descriptions  many  character-  are  given  just  as  they 
appear;  and  under  the  topic  "variation"  the  variation  of  only  the 
more  salient  characters  is  given.  It  must,  of  course,  be  realized  that 
more  characters  than  are  mentioned  under  this  topic  also  vary; 
for  instance,  lamella  formulae,  scales  about  insertion  of  arms.  etc. 
The  color  descriptions  are  taken  largely  from  alcoholic  specimens, 
since  it  is  in  this  condition  the  specimen  is  most  frequently  studied. 
When  the  coloration  is  taken  from  living  specimens,  this  fact  is 
mentioned.  It  must  be  remembered  that  specimens  preserved  in 
formalin*  are  usually  greatly  darkened,  and  often  the  pattern  is 
almost  wholly  obscured.  If  such  specimens  are  placed  below  water, 
the  pattern  can  often  be  more  easily  discerned. 

Where  a  series  is  available,  the  measurements  of  several  speci- 
mens are  given,  showing  a  series  from  young  to  old.  It  will  be 
noted  that  relative  body  proportions  change  as  the  specimens  grow 
older;  for  instance,  the  length  of  limb  in  proportion  to  the  axilla 
to  groin  measurement,  and  the  width  of  the  head  in  proportion  to 
its  length. 

Distribution  of  the  forms  is,  for  the  most  part,  based  on  the 
locality  records  of  specimens  examined.  A  certain  amount  of 
published  data  on  localities  has  been  discarded  or  retained  with  a 
question,  inasmuch  as  the  exact  identity  of  the  specimens  reported 
may  be  open  to  question. 

Owing  to  the  courtesy  of  the  authorities  of  the  various  museums 
of  the  United  States,  and  owners  of  certain  private  collections,  it 
has  been  possible  to  study  most  of  the  Eumeces  material  preserved 
in  the  United  States.  This  material  has  been  subjected  to  a  care- 
ful scrutiny  and  very  detailed  data  taken  on  practically  every  speci- 
men examined.  Thus,  for  each  single  specimen,  locality  data  and 
museum  data  have  been  recorded;  ten  measurements  have  been 
taken;  forty-seven  other  items  of  data  have  been  recorded,  together 
with  color  data  or  details  of  markings.  These  aforementioned  items 
involve  a  count  of  scales  from  parietals  to  above  anus;  four  counts 

*  One  should  avoid  preserving  Eumeces  in  formalin;  or,  if  used,  the  specimen  should  be 
allowed  to  remain  in  this  fluid  no  more  than  twenty-four  hours  before  the  transference  is 
made  to  water  (for  washing)   and  then  to  alcohol. 


26  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

of  scales  round  the  body  at  various  points;  and  when  tail  is  com- 
plete the  long  series  of  subcaudals.  This  involves  counting  nearly 
300  scales  on  a  single  specimen;  and  in  most  cases  these  were 
counted  under  a  binocular  microscope.  When  one  considers  the  very 
large  number  of  specimen  examined,  it  becomes  apparent  that  the 
accumulation  of  data  is  so  great  that  it  is  feasible  to  publish  but  a 
small  part  of  it. 

Something  less  than  one  third  of  the  species  has  been  observed 
and  collected  by  myself.  A  few  species  collected  by  others  have 
been  observed  alive  in  the  vivarium.  This  phase  of  the  work  has 
been  in  a  measure  neglected  since  in  the  case  of  only  a  few  species 
has  any  extensive  acquaintance  been  made  with  habits  and  life 
histories  in  the  field.  Data  obtained  appear  under  the  various 
species  discussed.  Specimens  of  certain  forms — obsoletus,  fasciatus 
and  septentrionalis  septentrionalis — brought  to  my  laboratory  have 
laid  eggs  and  the  young  have  been  hatched.  Noble  and  Mason 
(1933)  report  on  the  behavior  of  laticeps  and  fasciatus,  and  con- 
siderable data  on  behavior  in  the  field  appear  in  the  works  of 
many  authors. 

ILLUSTRATIONS 

The  drawings,  particularly  as  regards  the  appearance  of  the 
rostral  on  the  dorsal  side  of  the  head,  may  appear  to  differ  from 
the  details  given  in  the  descriptions.  This  is  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  artist  has  attempted  to  draw  in  perspective  the  receding  tip  of 
the  snout.  The  same  is  true  of  scales  in  the  dorsolateral  region  of 
the  head.  It  will  be  further  noted  that  the  drawings  are  consider- 
ably enlarged,  and  considerable  effort  has  been  made  to  show  more 
or  less  accurately  the  smaller  as  well  as  the  larger  scales. 

It  will  be  noted  from  descriptions  that  certain  changes  and  addi- 
tions have  been  made  in  nomenclature  of  the  scales.  This  has  been 
done  for  the  purpose  of  permitting  more  careful  word  pictures  of 
the  forms.  The  scales  to  which  these  words  apply  may  be  discerned 
from  the  section  beginning  on  page  70  or  from  the  figure  on  page  71. 

The  photographic  illustrations  have  been  made  by  photographing 
the  preserved  specimens  under  water.  The  specimens  are  placed 
on  pins  which  are  fastened  to  a  piece  of  glass.  This  is  submerged 
in  water  in  a  white  enameled  pan  at  some  distance  from  the  bottom, 
thus  allowing  the  shadow  formed  to  be  thrown  out  of  focus.  By 
this  method  much  of  the  light  reflected  from  the  scales  is  eliminated. 
The  same  results  can  be  obtained  by  using  a  glass  bottomed  con- 
tainer for  the  water. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Exjmeces  27 

TYPE  SPECIMENS 

Perhaps  nothing  is  more  important  to  a  reviewer  of  the  taxonomy 
of  a  group  than  a  study  of  the  type  material  on  which  the  various 
species  have  been  founded,  inasmuch  as  the  written  descriptions, 
often  brief,  and  the  figures,  if  any,  are  often  inadequate  to  convey 
a  correct  picture  of  the  species. 

In  this  study,  the  following  types  have  been  examined: 

cdtamirani  Duges.    Alfredo  Duges  Museum,  Guanajuato,  Mexico. 

anthracinus  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

bicolor  Harlan.    Academy  of  Natural  Sciences.  Philadelphia. 

brevilineatus  Cope.    United  States  National  Museum. 

brevipes  Cope.    United  States  National  Museum. 

coUmensis  Taylor.    Field  Museum  of  Natural  History. 

copci  Taylor.    E.  H.  Taylor-H.  Smith  Collection,  Kansas  University. 

dicei  Ruthven  and  Gaige.    Museum  of  Zoology,  University  of  Michigan. 

egregius  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

epipleurotus  Cope.    United  States  National  Museum. 

?  erylhrocephalus  Gilliams.    Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia. 

?  funebrosiis  Cope.    United  States  National  Museum. 

furcirostris  Cope.    Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia. 

gaigei  Tajdor.    Kansas  University  Museum. 

guttulatus  Hallowed.    United  States  National  Museum. 

indubitus  Taylor.    E.  H.  Taylor-H.  Smith  Collection,  Kansas  University. 

inexpectatus  Ta3  lor.    Kansas  University  Museum. 

inornalus  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

latiscutatus  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

latiscutatus  okadae  Stejneger.    United  States  National  Museum. 

leptogrammus  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

longirostris  Cope.    United  States  National  Museum. 

managuae  Dunn.    United  States  National  Museum. 

marginatus  Hallowed.    United  States  National  Museum  and  Academy 
of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia  (No.  9309). 

multivirgatus  Hallowed.    Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia. 

obsoletus  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

ochoterenae  Taylor.    E.  H.  Taylor-H.  Smith  Collection,  Kansas 
University. 

pachyurus  Cope.  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia. 

parviauriculatus  Taylor.    United  States  National  Museum. 

parvulus  Taylor.    United  States  National  Museum. 

pekinensis  Stejneger.    United  States  National  Museum. 

quadrilineatus  Hallowed.    United  States  National  Museum. 

rovirosae  Duges.    Alfredo  Duges  Museum,  Guanajuato,  Mexico. 

schmidti  Dunn.    Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia. 

septentrionalis  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

skiltonianus  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

sumichrasti  Cope.    United  States  National  Museum. 

tetragrammus  Baird.    United  States  National  Museum. 

tunganus  Stejneger.    United  States  National  Museum. 

xanthi  Giinther.    British  Museum,  Natural  History. 


28  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Paratypes  of  the  following  have  been  examined: 

chinensis  jormosanus  Van  Denburgh.    California  Academy  of  Sciences. 
marginatus  amamiensis  Van  Denburgh.    California  Academy  of  Sciences. 
marginatus  kikaigensis  Van  Denburgh.    California  Academy  of  Sciences. 
oshimensis  Thompson.    California  Academy  of  Sciences. 
stimsonii  Thompson.    California  Acadenw  of  Sciences. 

Neither  types  nor  paratypes  have   been  seen  of  the  following 
species  and  subspecies: 

aldrovandii  Dumeril  and  Bibron.    Probably  in  the  Museum  National 

d'Histoire  Naturelle,  Paris. 
amblygrammus  Cope.    Formerly  in  the  United  States  National  Museum. 

Now  apparently  lost. 
americanus  Harlan.    Originally  at  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences. 

Philadelphia.    Now  apparently  lost. 
algeriensis  Peters.    Zoologischen  Museum,  Berlin. 
barbouri  Van  Denburgh.    California  Academy  of  Sciences. 
*bellii  Gray.    British  Museum,  Natural  History. 

blythianus  Anderson.    Indian  Museum. 
*bocourti  Boulenger.    British  Museum,  Natural  History.    Same  type  as 

humilis. 
*brevirostris  Giinther.    British  Museum,  Natural  History. 
callicephalus  Bocourt.    Museum  National  d'Histoire  Naturelle,  Paris. 
capito  Bocourt.    Museum  National  d'Histoire  Naturelle,  Paris. 
■fcepedii  Merrem.    Location  of  type  unknown. 
chinensis  Gray.    British  Museum,  Natural  History. 
cyprius  Cuvier.    Probably  no  existing  type. 

dugesii  Thominot.    Museum  National  d'Histoire  Naturelle,  Paris. 
elegans  Boulenger.    British  Museum,  Natural  History. 
jfasciatus  Linnaeus.    Figure  from  Catesby's  "Carolina." 
halloivelli  Bocourt.    Museum  National  d'Histoire  Naturelle,  Paris. 
*humilis  Boulenger.    British  Museum,  Natural  History. 
japonicus  Peters.    Zoologischen  Museum,  Berlin. 
lagunensis  Van  Denburgh.    Type  formerly  in  the  California  Academy  of 

Sciences.    Destroyed  in  the  fire,  1906. 
laticeps  Schneider.    Present  location  unknown. 
lynxe  Wiegmann.    Zoologischen  Museum,  Berlin. 
meridionalis  Domergue.    ?  Museum  of  Oran. 

obtusirostris  Bocourt.    Museum  National  d'Histoire  Naturelle,  Paris. 
onocrepis   Cope.     Formerly   in   the   Peabody   Museum,   Salem,   Massa- 
chusetts.   Now  apparently  lost. 
pavimentatus  Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire.    Present  location  unknown. 
pluvialis  Cope.    Formerly  in  the  United  States  National  Museum.    Now 

apparently  lost. 
polygrammus  Cope.    Formerly  in  the  United  States  National  Museum. 

Now  apparently  lost. 
princeps  Eichwald.    Present  location  unknown.    Possibly  Moscow. 
pulcher  Dumeril  and  Bibron.    Probably  Museum  National  d'Histoire 
Naturelle,  Paris. 


*  Photographs  of  the  types  have  been  examined, 
t  Based  on  figures  which  have  been  examined. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Evmeces  29 

adrilineatus  Blyth.    Formerly  in  the  Indian  Museum.  Now  apparently 

lost. 
quadrivirgatus  Hallowell.    Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia. 
quinqiu  lineatus  Linnaeus.    Probably  no  existing  type. 
rufescens   Shaw.     Probably   no   existing   type   other   than   Aldrovandi's 

figure.    Quad.  Chip.,  p.  660. 
rujo-guttatus  Cantor.    British  Museum.  Natural  History. 
schneiderii  Daudin.     Probably  Museum  National  d'Histoire  Naturclle, 

Paris. 
schwartzei  Fischer.    Naturhistorischen  Museum,  Hamburg. 
*scutatus  Theobald.    Indian  Museum.    Same  type  as  taeniolatus. 
syriaca  Boettger.    Senckenbergian  Museum,  Frankfort  am  Main. 
*taeniolatus  Blyth.    Indian  Museum. 
triaspis  Cope.    Nomen  nudum. 

tatus  Daudin.    Probably  Museum  National  d'Histoire  Naturelle, 

Paris. 
vittigerum  Hallowell.     Formerly  in  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences, 

Philadelphia.    Now  apparently  lost. 
zarudnyi  Nikolski.    Probably  Museum  of  Leningrad. 

CLASSIFICATION  OF  THE  GENUS  EUMECES 

Class  Reptilia  Laurenti  (1768) 
^Subclass  Diapsida  Osborn  (1903) 
Order  Squamata  Oppel  (1811) 

Suborder  Sauria  MacCartney  (1802) 

Division  Autarchoglossa  "Wagler  (1830) 
Section  Scincomorpha  Camp  (1923) 

Superfamily  Scineoidea  Cuvier  (1817) 
Family  Scincidae  Gray  (1825) 

Genus  Eumeces  Wiegmann  (1834) 

GENUS  EUMECES  WIEGMANN 
SYNONYMY 

175S.  Lacerta  (part.)  Linnaeus.  Systema  Naturae,  10th  Ed.,  Vol.  1,  p.  205;  idem,  12th  Ed., 
1766,  p.   359. 

1824.  Scincus  (part.)  Harlan.  Journ.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.,  Phila.,  IV,  pt.  2,  1824,  p.  286; 
idem,  VI,  pt.  1,  1829,  p.  9;    and  Med.  Phys.  Res.,  1829,  p.   137. 

1826.    Mabuya  (part.)   Fitzinger.     Neu.   Class.   Rept.,   1826,  p.   23. 

1830.    Euprepis  (part.)   Wagler.     Nat.   Syst.   Amph..   1S30,  p.    161. 

1834.  Eutncces  (part.)  Wiegmann.  Herp.  Mex.,  1834,  p.  36  (type  Scincvs  pavimentatus  = 
Eumeces  pavimentatus  Geoffroy  [part.]);  Wiegmann,  Arch,  fur  Natur.,  II.  2,  1835, 
p.  288  (type  Eumeces  pavimentatus  Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire)  ;  idem,  III,  1,  1837,  pp.  131, 
132:  Hallowell,  Trans.  Amer.  Philos.  Soc,  New  Series,  1860,  p.  73  (subgenus); 
Peters,  Mon.  Ber.  Akad.  Wiss.  Berlin,  1864,  p.  48;  Stoliczka,  Journ.  Asiatic  Soc. 
Bengal,  XLI,  1872,  p.  121;  Bocourt,  Miss.  Soi.  Mexique,  Liv.  VI.  1879,  pp.  418-422; 
Smith,  Rep.  Geol.  Surv.  Ohio,  V,  pt.  1.  1882,  p.  650;  Murray,  Zool.  Sind,  1884, 
p.  355;    Boulenger,   Cat.  Liz.   Brit.   Mus.,  Ill,   1887.  pp.   365-366;    Hoffman,   in  Bronn, 

*  Photographs  of  the  types  have  been  examined. 
X  Parapsii>a  Williston;    Lepidosauria  Romer. 


30  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Klass.  Ord.  Thier-R.,  VI,  pt.  Ill,  1890,  pp.  1148,  1149;  Boulengpr,  Trans.  Zool.  Soc. 
London,  XIII,  1895,  p.  136;  Cope,  Amer.  Nat.,  1896,  pp.  1003-1026;  Herrick,  Terry, 
Herrick,  Bull.  Sci.  Lab.  Denison  Univ.,  XI,  1899,  pp.  146-147;  Stejneger,  Bull.  U. 
S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  58,  1906,  pp.  193-195;  Beddard,  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1907, 
p.  58:  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  4th  Ser.,  Ill,  1908-1913,  pp.  211-213; 
Ditmars,  The  Reptile  Book,  1919,  pp.  195,  196;  Schmidt,  Bull.  Amer.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist., 
XLIX,  1919,  p.  30;  Camp,  Bull.  Amer.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  XLVHI,  1923,  p.  33: 
Stejneger,  Proc.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  LXVI,  1926,  pp.  44,  45;  Sun,  Cont.  Biol.  Lab.  Sci. 
Soc.  China,  II,  1920,  p.  2. 
1839.  Plestiodon  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  p.  697,  (subgenus);  Gray,  Cat. 
Spec.   Liz.   Coll.   Brit.    Mus.,    1845,   p.   90   (genus);    Hallowell,   Trans.   Amer.   Phil.   Soc, 

1860,  XI,  p.  81  (subgenus);  Brown,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1857,  p.  215; 
Hoffman,  in  Bronn,  Klass.  Ord.  Thier-R.,  VI,  pt.  Ill,  1890,  p.  1148;  Brown,  Proc. 
Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1908,  pp.  118,  119;  Van  Denburgh,  Occas.  Papers  Cal.  Acad. 
Sci.,  X,  No.  1,   1922,  p.  577;    Pratt,  Vert.  Anim.  Amer.,   1923,  p.  205. 

1843.    Pleistodon   Fitzinger.      Syst.    Rept.,    1843,    p.    22    (emendation;    type   Pleistodon    quin- 

quelineatum). 
1843.    Pariocela  Fitzinger.     Syst.  Rept.,  1843,  p.   22   (type  Pleistodon  laticeps). 
1848.    Plistodon    Agassiz.      Nomencl.    Zool.    Ind.    Univ.,    184S,    p.    863    (emendation);     Cope, 

Second   and  Third  Ann.   Rep.   Peabody  Acad.,   1871,  p.   82. 
1852.    Lamprosaurus  Hallowell.    Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1852,  p.  206  (type  Lamprosaurus 

guttulatus). 
1854.    Eurylepis  Blyth.     Journ.  Asiatic  Soc.   Bengal,  XXIII,   p.   739   (type  Eurylepis  taenio- 

latus). 
1864.    Mabouia   Gunther.      Rept.    Brit.   India,    1864,   p.    82;    idem,   Proc.   Zool.    Soc.   London, 

1861,  p.   316. 

1887.    Platypholis    (non    Boulenger)    Duges.      La   Naturaleza,    2d    Ser.,   I,    1887,    p.    486    (type 
Eumeces  altamirani  Duges). 

History.  The  generic  name  Eumeces  (from  tviArJKrjs,  elongated)  was 
proposed  by  Wiegmann  in  his  Herpetologia  Mexicana  (1834,  p.  36). 
Three  species  were  included:  Scincits  pavimentatus  Geoff roy;  Scin- 
cus  rufescens  Merrem ;  and  Scincus  punctatus  Schneider.  He  defined 
the  group  as  follows: 

"Scutella  verticalia  tria;  frontalia  tria;  dentes  primores  7,  maxillares  utrinque 
20/25;  narcs  in  medio  scutcllo  sitae  (scutellis  duobus  in  unum  coalitis); 
squamae  dorsi  laeves." 

This  was  divided  into  two  groups: 

"A.  Palpebra  superior  mediocris;  inferior  scutellato-squamosa ;  dentes  pal- 
atini numerosi.    Scincus  pavimentatus  Geoff.;  Scincus  rufescens  Merr. 

"B.  Palpebra  superior  brevis,  inferior  perspicttlata:  Scincus  punctatus 
Schneid." 

The  following  year,  in  an  article  in  which  he  reviewed  his  own 
work  (Archiv.  fur  Naturg.,  Vol.  2,  1835,  p.  288),  Wiegmann  desig- 
nated Scincus  pavimentatus  as  the  type  of  the  genus  by  a  statement 
in  which  he  says  that  both  Scincus  rufescens  Merrem  and  Scincus 
punctatus  Schneider  had  been  included  in  the  group  due  to  error, 
and  that  both  belong  to  the  genus  Euprepes,  sensu  strict u,  while 
only  Scincus  pavimentatus  Geoffroy  belongs  to  Eumeces.  Thus, 
with  a  single  species  in  the  genus,  this  species  must  become  the 
genotype.  And  since  Wiegmann  must  be  considered  the  first  re- 
viewer, the  genus  Eumeces  must  stand. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  31 

Dumeril  and  Bibron    (Erpetologie  Generate,  1839,  V,  pp.   629, 

630i.  after  discussing  at   length  the  group  Eumeces  of  Wiegman, 

state: 

"II  resulte  de  ces  diverses  observations  que  le  sous-genre  Eumeces  de  M. 
Wiegmann  ne  repose  pas  sur  des  bases  assez  fixes  pour  que  nous  puissions  le 
conserver;  nous  en  prenons  simplement  le  nora  pour  I'appliquer  au  groupe  dont 
les  caracteres  essentiels  sont  exprimes  dans  la  diagnose  mise  en  tete  de  cet 
article,  groupe  auquel  nous  donnons  toutefois  pour  type  une  des  trois  especes 
d'Eumeces  de  M.  Wiegmann,  ou  le  Srincus  punctatus  de  Schneider." 

It  is  apparent  that  these  reviewers  were  unaware  of  the  second 
contribution  on  the  subject  by  Wiegmann  himself,  so  that  their 
choice  of  a  genotype  cannot  stand.  In  the  above  work  these  authors 
associated  under  the  genus  (sous-genre)  Eumeces,  Wiegmann,  the 
following  forms:  Eumeces  punctatus  Wiegmann  [=  Riopa  punc- 
tata (Linne)];  Eumeces  sloanii  Dumeril  and  Bibron  [=  Mabuya 
sloanii  (Daudin)]  ;  Emm  ces  spixi  Dumeril  and  Bibron  [=  Mabuya 
aurata  Schneider  (part.)];  Eumeces  mabouia  Dumeril  and  Bibron 
\=  Mabuya  nigropunctata  (Spix)];  Eumeces  freycinetii  Dumeril 
and  Bibron  [=  Emoia  atrocostatum  (Lesson)];  Eumeces  carteretii 
Dumeril  and  Bibron  [=  Emoia  cyanogaster  (Lesson)];  Eumeces 
baudinii  Dumeril  and  Bibron  [=  Emoia  baudinii  (Dumeril  and 
Bibron)]:  Eumeces  lessonii  Dumeril  and  Bibron  [=  Emoia  cya- 
n ura  (Lesson)];  Eumeces  opelii  Dumeril  and  Bibron  [=  Riopa 
rufescens  (Shaw)];  Eumeces  microlepis  Dumeril  and  Bibron 
[=  Riopa  microlepis  (Dumeril  and  Bibron)]. 

For  the  species  listed  by  Wiegmann  as  Scincus  pavimentatus  and 
certain  other  related  forms,  Dumeril  and  Bibron  erected  the  genus 
Plestiodon  and  associated  in  the  genus  four  presumed  species,  as 
follows:  Plestiodon  aldrovandii  [=  Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin) 
(part.)  and  Eumeces  algeru  nsis  (Peters)  (part.)  ]  ;  Plestiodon  sim  ns< 
Dumeril  and  Bibron  [=  Eumeces  chinensis  (Gray)];  Plestiodon 
laticeps  [=  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider)];  Plestiodon  quinquel- 
ineatum  [=  ?  Eumeces  fasciatus  Linne)]  ;  and  Plestiodon  pulchrum 
[=  Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron)].  No  geno- 
type is  mentioned. 

The  specific  forms  now  recognized  under  the  Schneiderii  group 
were  placed  in  a  single  species;  and  another  recognized  form,  Eu- 
prepes  lynxe  Wiegmann,  was  placed  in  the  synonymy  of  the  species 
Eumeces  fasciatus. 

Fitzinger  (Syst.  Rept.,  1843,  p.  22)  designates  the  genotype  as 
Pleistodon  quinquelineatum  [=  ?  Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linne)]. 


32  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Many  subsequent  authors  followed  Dumeril  and  Bibron  in  their 
interpretation  of  the  genus  Eumeces.  Thus  we  find  in  Giinther's 
"Reptiles  of  British  India"  (1864)  a  list  of  sixteen  species  placed  in 
the  genus,  none  of  which  are  now  recognized  as  belonging  to 
Eumeces  Wiegmann.  The  three  species  of  true  Eumeces  treated  in 
the  work,  Eumeces  quadrilineatus  (Blyth),  Eumeces  chinensis 
(Gray),  and  Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin)  are  placed  in  the  genus 
Mabuya  Fitzinger,  as  Mabouia  quadrilineata,  Mabouia  chinensis 
and  Mabouia  aurata,  respectively.  A  fourth  species,  erroneously 
placed  in  this  group,  is  Mabouia  maculata  Blyth  [=  Sphenomor- 
phus  maculatus  (Blyth)]. 

Boulenger   (Cat.  Liz.,  Ill,  1887)   and  Cope   (Croc,  Liz.  Snakes, 
1900)    have  both  utilized  the  genus  Eumeces  for  the  lizards  as- 
sociated under  the  designation  Plestiodon  by  Dumeril  and  Bibron. 
A  few  other  names,  some  emendations,  have  been  proposed  for 
species  now  recognized  in  the  genus  Eumeces. 

Pleistodon.  This  was  an  emendation  of  Fitzinger  (Syst.  Rept., 
1843,  p.  22),  who  designated  the  type  of  Dumeril  and  Bibron's 
genus  as  Pleistodon  quinquelineatum  (Linne). 

Pariocela  Fitzinger  (loc.  cit.)  The  type  designated  is  Pleistodon 
laticeps  (Schneider). 

Plistodon  Agassiz,  Nomen.  Zool.  Index  Univers.,  1848,  p.  863 
(Emendation). 

Eurylepis  Blyth,  Journ.  Asia.  Soc.  Bengal,  XXIII,  p.  739.  This 
name  was  proposed  for  a  species  of  Indian  skink  named  taeniolatus 
and  characterized  by  broad  plates  across  the  back. 

Lamprosaurus  Hallowell,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1852,  p. 
206.  This  genus  was  erected  for  a  young  specimen  of  Eumeces 
obsoletus  which  Hallowell  named  Lamprosaurus  guttulatus.  The 
adult  Eumeces  obsoletus  he  placed  in  the  genus  Plestiodon.  The 
character  used  for  the  separation  of  the  two  forms  appears  to  have 
been  the  apparent  absence  of  pterygoid  teeth  in  the  young  speci- 
men— "no  palatine  or  sphenoidal  teeth." 

In  1857  (Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  pp.  215,  216),  having 
obtained  other  specimens  of  the  same  species,  he  considers  them  as 
belonging  to  Plestiodon  and  discards  his  own  generic  name  with  the 
following  statement:  "The  original  specimen  from  New  Mexico 
was  in  such  a  condition  as  to  render  it  extremely  difficult  to  de- 
termine its  true  characters."  He  still  failed  to  realize  that  he  was 
dealing  with  the  young  of  obsoletus. 
Platypholis  A.  Duges,  La  Naturaleza,  Ser.  2,  T.  I,  1887-1890, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  33 

pp.  485,  486.  This  generic  designation  was  proposed  for  a  Mexican 
species,  which  he  describes  under  the  name  Eumeces  altamirani,  in 
the  following  manner: 

"iDebemos  considerar  este  cscincoideo  como  una  variedad  nionslruosa  6 
el  adulto  del  Eum.  Hallowelli?  No  lo  creo,  porque  ademas  de  otros  caracteres 
menos  importantes  que  los  soparan,  se  observa  una  regularidad  tal  en  la 
coalecencia  de  las  escamas  medianas  de  todo  el  dorso,  que  deficilmente  se 
puede  considerar  esta  disposition  como  un  caso  de  anomalia.  Como  esta 
particularidad  es  desconocida  entre  los  otros  escincoideos  creo  que  si  no  hay 
lugar  de  establecer  un  genero  especial  para  el  Eumeces  Altamirani,  a  lo  menos 
se  le  debe  conservar  con  justicia  cl  nombre  especifico  que  le  impongo;  pero 
si  se  creyese  conveniente  formarlo,  se  le  puede  llamar  Platypholis." 

The  action  of  Dumeril  and  Bibron  in  proposing  Plestiodon  for 
this  group  does  not  change  or  modify  the  proposal  of  Wiegmann 
in  1835.  However,  it  has  influenced  many  subsequent  authors. 
As  late  as  1908  Arthur  Erwin  Brown  (Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila., 
1908,  p.  112),  after  a  short  review  of  the  forms  listed  in  the 
Wiegmannian  genus  Eumeces,  concluded  that  Plestiodon  is  the 
available  name  for  the  genus,  a  suggestion  that  was  followed  by 
many  American  herpetologists,  the  name  appearing  as  late  as 
1917  in  the  Stejneger  and  Barbour  checklist  of  North  American 
Amphibians  and  Reptiles. 

However,  in  the  edition  of  1924  of  this  same  work,  Eumeces  was 
again  restored,  and  one  of  the  authors,  in  1926  (Stejneger,  Proc. 
U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.  Vol.  66,  p.  45),  points  out  the  steps  by  which  he 
has  determined  the  type  of  the  genus. 


3 — 1123 


34  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

GENERIC  RELATIONSHIPS 

Within  the  family  Scincidae,  Eumeces  belongs  to  the  section 
characterized  by  conical  maxillary  teeth,  the  presence  of  pterygoid 
teeth,  and  an  unmodified  tail — the  section  also  occupied  by  the 
genera  Mabuya  and  'Lygosoma'  Boulenger,  although  certain  mem- 
bers of  the  genus  Mabuya  display  a  tendency  toward  bicuspid 
teeth,  and  some  of  the  lygosomoid  genera  likewise  show  a  de- 
parture from  the  typical  conical  teeth. 

When  compared  with  Mabuya,  it  is  noted  that  Eumeces  has  the 
palatine  and  pterygoid  bones  separated  on  the  median  line  of  the 
palate.  However,  this  is  a  variable  character  in  Eumeces,  some 
fomns  having  these  elements  widely  separated,  others  showing 
a  closer  approach  or  actual  contact,  at  least  of  the  palatines, 
anteriorly. 

When  compared  with  'Lygosoma'  we  find  that  here,  too,  varia- 
tion obtains  in  the  relation  of  the  palatines  to  each  other  (usually, 
if  not  always,  meeting  on  the  mesial  line  of  the  palate)  and  the 
pterygoids  are  in  contact  at  least  anteriorly. 

In  the  conformity  of  external  characters  the  approach  in  the 
greater  number  of  points  appears  to  be  closest  to  certain  smooth 
or  nearly  smooth-scaled  forms  of  Mabuya. 

Thus,  the  nostril  is  pierced  in  a  nasal,  and  a  postnasal  is  present. 
There  are  two  loreals  and  two  presuboculars;  the  superciliary  series 
bears  the  same  general  characters;  the  series  of  enlarged  plates  on 
the  lower  eyelid,  the  paired  prefrontals,  the  paired  frontoparietals, 
the  four  supraoculars,  the  lobules  on  the  edge  of  the  auricular  open- 
ing, and  other  very  numerous  characters  are  practically  the  same  in 
the  two  genera.  The  temporals,  however,  are  not,  at  least  in  speci- 
mens of  Mabuya  examined,  clearly  differentiated,  as  they  are  in 
Eumeces. 

In  certain  lygosomoid  genera  (notably  Dasia) ,  we  find  a  close 
approach  to  the  characters  of  the  temporal  scales  and  the  widened 
subcaudals  of  Eumeces,  but  as  regards  many  other  characters,  a 
much  greater  difference  obtains  than  in  Mabuya. 

At  no  point,  however,  do  the  genera  approach  so  closely  that  there 
can  be  any  confusion  in  placing  the  known  forms  in  their  proper 
genus. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Fa  mixes 


35 


GROUPS  WITHIN  THE  GENUS 


ii 


in  < 


A        < 


B 


!  c  I 


D        < 


e       -< 


j        i 


1.  SCHWARTZEI  GROUP 

2.  TAENIOLATUS  GROUP 

3.  SCHNEIDERII  GROUP 

4.  LONGIROSTRIS  GROUP 

5.  LYNXE  GROUP 

6.  SUMICHRASTI  GROUP 

7.  FASCIATUS  GROUP 

S.  BREVILINEATUS  GROUP 

9.  OBSOLETUS  GROUP 

10.  MULTIVIRGATUS  GROUP 

11.  ANTHRACINUS  GROUP 

12.  SKILTONIANUS  GROUP 

13.  QUADRILINEATUS  GROUP 

14.  BREVIROSTRIS  GROUP 


{» 


5.    EGREGIUS  GROUP 


86  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

EUMECES  A  GENERIC  ENTITY 

In  dealing  with  the  genus  Eumeces  it  has  been  convenient  to 
associate  certain  related  species  into  groups,  but  with  no  intention 
in  mind  of  considering  them  of  the  status  of  genera  or  subgenera. 
However,  since  certain  earlier  authors  have  proposed  generic  names 
for  species  or  groups  of  species  now  recognized  in  the  genus  Eumeces, 
it  may  be  wise  to  consider  the  characters  on  which  these  generic 
names  have  been  proposed. 

It  will  be  noted  in  the  arrangement  given  above,  that  the  species 
fall  readily  into  three  groups.  This  grouping  is  based  on  the  char- 
acter and  relationship  of  the  preanal  scales  (see  key).  Section  I 
includes  the  Taeniolatus,  Schwartzei  and  Schneiderii  groups;  Sec- 
tion II,  the  Longirostris  group;  and  Section  III,  the  remaining  eleven 
groups.  Should  these  groups  be  considered  worthy  of  generic  (or 
subgeneric)  distinctions,  we  find  that  the  oldest  generic  designation 
for  the  first  is  Eumeces,  since  E.  pavimentatus  of  the  Schneiderii 
group  is  the  type  of  the  genus  (designated  by  Wiegmann  in  1835). 
For  the  second,  the  Longirostris  group,  no  name  has  been  proposed. 
For  the  third  group  the  name  Pariocela  Fitzinger  is  the  oldest 
available  generic  name  (Eumeces  laticeps  the  type),  rather  than 
Plestiodon,  since  Dumeril  and  Bibron  apparently  consider  E.  pavi- 
mentatus (the  type  of  Eumeces)  as  the  type  of  their  genus,  and  it 
is  therefore  a  synonym  of  Eumeces.  Pleistodon  of  Fitzinger,  with 
Pleistodon  quinquelineatus  as  type,  is  an  emendation. 

In  the  second  grouping  of  six  sections  the  following  associations 
obtain.  The  old  section  I  is  divided  into  two  groups,  group  A  con- 
taining the  Taeniolatus  and  Schwartzei  groups,  and  for  which  two 
names  have  been  proposed:  Eurylepis  Blyth  (1854)  (Eumeces 
taeniolatus  the  type)  and  Platypholis  Duges  (1887),  with  E.  al- 
tamirani  as  the  type.  The  latter  generic  name,  however,  is  pre- 
occupied. For  group  B,  including  the  Schneiderii  group,  the  name 
Eumeces  would  be  available.  Group  C  (identical  with  section  II, 
including  loyigirostris)  is  without  a  name,  as  noted  previously. 
Group  D,  including  the  Lynxe,  Sumichrasti,  Fasciatus,  Brevilineatus, 
Obsoletus,  Multivirgatus  and  Anthracinus  groups,  has  available 
Fitzinger's  Pariocela  (1843).  A  second  name,  Lamprosaurus  Hallo- 
well  (1852)  (type  Eumeces  obsoletus),  is  available  if  Pariocela  were 
untenable.  For  group  E,  including  the  Brevirostris,  Skiltonianus 
and  Quadrilineatus  groups,  no  generic  name  has  been  proposed;  nor 
has  a  generic  name  been  suggested  for  group  F,  including  the 
Egregius  group. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  37 

The  likelihood  that  further  generic  or  subgeneric  divisions  of  the 
genus  will  ever  be  considered  for  species  now  known  is  extremely 
remote. 

Boulenger  (1887)  apparently  is  the  first  recent  author  to  treat 
the  genus  as  a  whole,  and  since  this  work  was  published  the  only 
suggestion  of  a  generic  division  is  that  of  Dunn  (1933),  who  states, 
''These  are  the  only  Eumeces  [viz.,  schwartzei,  managuae,  scutatus 
and  taeniolatus]  with  enlarged  middorsals,  and  it  is  obvious  that 
they  form  a  natural  and  a  closely  related  subgroup  of  the  genus. 
Indeed,  in  some  ways  each  of  the  American  species  is  more  like 
one  of  the  Indian  species  than  it  is  like  its  American  relative.  The 
distribution,  the  Punjab,  the  east  coast  of  southern  Mexico,  and 
the  west  coast  of  Nicaragua,  is  quite  wierd;  but  the  American 
species  have  certainly  no  direct  relationship  with  any  other  Ameri- 
can Eumeces.  Save  for  the  recently  described  schmidti  from  Hon- 
duras, which  is  close  enough  to  fasciatus,  schwartzei  and  managuae 
are  the  only  New  World  Eumeces  south  of  the  Mexican  Plateau. 
I  am  somewhat  inclined  to  use  Eurylepis  Blyth  (1854,  Journ.  Asi- 
atic. Soc.  Bengal  23,  p.  739,  type  taeniolatus)  as  a  name  for  these 
four  "Eumeces"  with  enlarged  middorsals." 

That  this  character  is  not  a  "fixed"  character  is  evidenced  by  the 
variation  that  obtains  in  the  number  of  these  dorsals  that  are  fused 
or  divided  in  the  individual  species.  Since  only  a  part  of  the  two 
median  dorsal  rows  fuse  there  is  usually  a  double  series  of  scales 
following  the  nuchals  that  are  not  fused,  and  in  some  forms,  a 
double  series  following  the  fused  series,  anterior  to  the  base  of  the 
tail.  Should  one  wish  to  separate  these  forms  it  seems  quite  likely 
that  other  characters  less  obvious  but  certainly  of  more  "generic" 
importance  should  be  used;  but  when  other  differential  characters 
are  used,  the  association  of  taeniolatus  appears  closer  to  members 
of  the  Schneiderii  group,  which  would  thus  necessitate  the  erection 
of  a  name  for  members  of  the  Schwartzei  group. 

I  feel  quite  certain  that  any  breaking  up  of  the  present  group 
here  treated  as  a  generic  entity  is  unwise,  since,  if  begun,  it  would 
necessitate  the  erection  and  recognition  of  several  genera,  four  of 
which  (including  quadrilineatus,  egregius,  taeniolatus,  lynxe)  would 
be  monotypic  and  would  in  no  measure  have  the  same  generic  sig- 
nificance as  even  the  genera  (subgenera)  formed  from  the  genus 
"Lygosoma"  as  used  by  Boulenger. 

It  is  significant  that  the  recent  study  of  the  skulls  of  Eumeces 
by  Kingman  (1932)  shows  no  osteological  differences  of  sufficient 
import  to  warrant  generic  separation. 


38 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


The  more  one  considers  the  problem  of  breaking  up  the  genus 
Eumeces  (as  currently  comprehended)  into  genera  and  subgenera 
of  doubtful  validity,  the  greater  becomes  the  certitude  that  we  are 
dealing  with  a  single  generic  entity,  all  of  whose  species  are  quite 
clearly  and  entirely  set  apart  from  any  other  such  generic  groups 
and  whose  relationships  among  themselves  is  such  as  to  warrant  a 
single  generic  association. 

PHYLOGENETIC  TREE 

The  following  figure  expresses  in  general  my  opinion  of  the 
relationships  of  the  various  species.  I  conceive  of  the  ancestral 
type  as  a  medium-sized,  five-lined  skink  approximating  fasciatus 


-parent  u=ja  ,intl ,  _  \y 


..JX**0^ 


W     1         Jfi^^ 


!     ^  afasalgfoa. 


loagjcastas 

-s. 


/  /jpSprr*/lr-r,e=r->1-crt-t  i  g 


^rtn-if/ns 


.  sch^ 


V  attamir-ani 


Fig.  1.   Phylogenesis  in  the  genus  Eumeces  Wiegmann. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  39 

in  size,  character  and  habits.  The  relationships  of  gaigei  and 
parviuuriculatus  are  in  doubt.  It  is  possible  that  the  former  may 
actually  be  a  derivative  of  the  Brevilimatits  group,  allied  with 
callia  phalus;  and  that  the  latter  may  be  a  derivative  of  the 
Brevirostris  group,  a  relative  of  ochoterenae.  The  evidence  for 
these  associations  is  equally  as  strong  as  that  which  has  caused 
me  to  associate  them  with  the  Multivirgatus  group.  The  young  of 
these,  when  discovered,  may  offer  more  certain  clues.  Should  the 
other  relationship  be  the  correct  one,  their  present  resemblances 
may  be  explained  as  the  effect  of  similar  environment. 

GENERIC  DESCRIPTION 

The  genus  may  be  defined  as  follows:  Maxillary  and  mandibular 
teeth  conical  or  with  rounded,  spheroid  crowns,  variable  in  number; 
the  premaxillary  teeth,  usually  three  on  left  side,  four  on  right  side; 
pterygoid  teeth  present,  variable  in  size  and  number;  prevomerine 
teeth  present  or  absent  (usually  two  when  present) ;  the  palatine 
bones  not  meeting  on  the  median  plane  of  the  palate,  but  varying 
in  degree  of  proximity ;  pterygoids  separated  on  median  line. 

Eyelids  well  developed,  the  upper  eyelid  variable  (better  de- 
veloped in  African  and  western  Asiatic  forms)  ;  tympanum  present, 
deeply  sunk;  nostril  pierced  in  a  nasal,  which  may  be  single,  partly 
divided  by  a  suture  or  more  or  less  completely  divided,  in  which 
case  the  nostril  is  between  the  two  moieties;  supranasals  present; 
never  more  than  four  supraoculars;  prefrontals,  frontoparietal  and 
interparietal  distinct.  Limbs  well  developed,  pentadactyl,  all  digits 
clawed;  digits  subcylindrical  or  compressed,  with  transverse  lamel- 
late scales  below,  which  may  be  compressed,  keeled  or  padlike  in 
character.  Body  scales  usually  small,  more  or  less  cycloid,  oc- 
casionally fusing  dorsally  into  larger  plates. 

DESCRIPTION  OF  THE  SKELETAL  ELEMENTS  OF 

EUMECES 

I  have  chosen  as  a  type  for  this  description,  a  skeleton  of  a  speci- 
men of  Eumeces  obsoletus  from  Kansas.  The  description  of  the 
skull  is  taken  from  Kingman  (1932). 

"Frontal.  The  frontal  bones  are  two  in  number  located  between  the  orbits 
of  the  eye  and  beneath  the  frontal  and  frontoparietal  scales  of  the  dorsal 
surface  of  the  head.  In  the  median  line  each  is  flattened  except  for  slight 
depressions,  while  along  the  sides  extending  from  the  orbit  to  its  anterior 
extremity  there  is  a  beveled  edge  that  forms  the  support  for  the  supraocular 


40 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


PREMAX 


MAX 


MAX 


—  PREMAX 


PRVOM 


SO  Aw 
EXO/BA°  PARO 


BAO'   vEXO 


1.  Eumeceschinensis. 


2.  Eumeceschinensis. 


S°/  DXO  n,    rSUPT 

EXO  PARO- 


MAX-- 


— PREMAX 


PRVOM 


EPG— 


BAO  vEXO 


3.  Eumcccsobso'etus. 


4.  Eumecesobsoletus. 


Fig.  2.  1,  Eumeces  chinensis  (Gray)  Amoy,  China.  Male.  E.  H.  T. 
Coll.  No.  880;  2,  Same,  ventral  view.  3,  Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and 
Girard),  Lawrence,  Kan.  E.  H.  T.  Coll.  No.  881.  4,  Same,  ventral  view. 
From  Kingman  (1932). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


41 


FR-M- 


-PREMAX 


%\^-PI 


\     SUPT 
EXO  BAO  PARO 


BAO'   EXO 


1.  Eumeces  laticeps 


2.  Eumeces  latic:ps. 


-PREMAX 


^V-— MAX 


SO     .~y~    PAR0' 
EXO   BAO  SUPT 

3.  E.  schneidem  pavi.nentatus 


PREMAX 


„—  PRVOM 


DAO     EXO 
4   E   schneidern  pavimentatus. 


Fig.  2a.  Skulls  of  Eumeces.  1,  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider).  K.  U. 
No.  9127,  Imboden,  Ark.;  Byron  Marshall  Coll.  Adult  female;  dorsal 
view.  2.  Same  specimen,  ventral  view.  3,  Eumeces  ■pavimentatus  (Geof- 
froy-St.  Hillaire).  E.  H.  T.  No.  860,  Haiffa,  Syria.  Dorsal  view.  4,  Same 
specimen,  ventral  view.    From  Kingman  (1932). 


42  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

scales  above  the  eyes.  Anteriorly  it  articulates  with  the  nasal  bone,  to  which 
it  unites  along  a  crescentic  suture  from  the  median  line.  In  the  anterior 
lateral  portion  of  the  orbit  it  is  in  contact  with  the  prefrontal.  A  small 
maxillary  process  is  found  on  the  anterior  lateral  surface  where  it  comes  in 
contact  with  the  maxillary  bone  lateral  to  the  nasal  suture.  Posteriorly  it 
meets  the  anterior  edge  of  the  parietal  bone.  Laterally  along  the  margin  of 
the  orbit  it  is  in  contact  with  the  postorbital. 

"Parietal.  The  parietal  is  a  single  median  bone  located  beneath  the 
parietal,  interparietal  and  nuchal  scales  of  the  surface  of  the  head.  This  is 
composed  of  a  more  or  less  triangular  body  which  has  within  it,  in  the  median 
line,  a  small  opening,  the  parietal  foramen  for  the  organ  of  the  same  name. 
The  opening  is  a  little  anterior  to  the  middle  of  the  body  of  the  bone.  Ex- 
tending posteriolaterally  are  two  processes,  the  squamosal  processes.  These 
are  curved  and  slightly  recurved  away  from  the  median  line.  In  the  median 
line  at  the  posterior  border  there  is  a  prominent  notch  into  which  fits  a 
membrane  and  a  small  knob-like  element  that  suggests  the  location  of  an 
"interparietal."  Lateral  to  this  notch  two  posteriorly  directed  processes  ex- 
tend to  meet  the  occipital  bone.  Along  the  median  and  posterior  border  of 
the  parietal  there  is  a  marked  ridge  which  is  continuous  with  an  obliquely 
directed  surface  for  the  attachment  of  the  neck  muscles  of  the  skull. 

"On  the  ventral  surface  of  the  body  of  the  parietal  bone  and  in  direct  line 
with  the  parietal  foramen  are  two  sliverlike  processes  which  extend  down  al- 
most at  right  angles  to  the  remainder  of  the  bone.  These  articulate  with  the 
epipterygoid  and  with  the  latter  enforce  the  upper  jaw  and  gave  rigidity  to 
the  membrane  surrounding  the  brain. 

"The  parietal  articulates  with  the  following:  frontal,  squamosal,  postfrontal, 
paraoccipital,  and  epipterygoid  bones. 

"Supraoccipital.  The  supraoccipital  is  an  unpaired  median  element  fused, 
in  the  adult,  at  the  basal  part  of  the  skull  with  the  exoccipitals,  paroccipitals 
and  some  of  the  bones  of  the  otic  capsule.  The  posterior  and  lateral  limits  of 
this  element  cannot  be  distinguished  in  the  adult.  It  probably  forms  a 
median  raised  area  from  the  foramen  magnum  forward  to  the  median  line  of 
the  parietal  as  well  as  a  slight  flattened  process  on  either  side  of  raised  median 
portion.  These  flattened  processes  contain  the  median  portions  of  the  semi- 
circular canals  which  are  visible  from  the  dorsal  surface. 

"Exoccipitals.  The  exoccipitals  form  the  sides  of  the  foramen  magnum  and 
the  lateral  pieces  of  the  occipital  condyle.  The  occipital  condyle  is  composed 
of  three  parts;  the  median  piece  is  the  basioccipital  while  the  lateral  two  are 
exoccipital  parts.  The  main  portion  of  this  bone  is  inseparably  fused  with 
the  paroccipitals.  The  lateral  processes  articulate  with  the  quadrate,  parietal, 
squamosal  and  supratemporal  bones. 

"Basioccipital.  The  basioccipital  is  placed  ventrad  to  the  foramen  magnum 
forming  about  thirty  degrees  around  that  aperture.  The  general  outline  of 
this  bone  is  suggestive  of  the  shape  of  a  diamond  with  its  long  axis  running 
from  left  to  right.  Along  the  anterior  and  lateral  border  of  this  diamond- 
shaped  area  the  basioccipital  articulates  with  the  basisphenoid  by  an  irregular 
suture.  In  the  adult  a  slight  depressed  groove  remains,  separating  the  basioc- 
cipital and  the  exoccipital  bones. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  43 

"Basisphenoid.  The  basisphenoid  is  located  just  anterior  to  the  basioc- 
cipital,  with  which  it  articulates  by  an  irregular  suture.  The  body  of  this 
bone  is  more  or  les.-;  triangular  with  the  base  posterior  and  its  apex  extending 
to  the  interorbital  rostrum  anteriorly ;  which  is  in  the  region  of  the  presphenoid. 
Extending  laterally  from  the  body  are  two  fan-shaped  processes,  the  pterygoid 
processes,  which  form  broad  but  thin  facets  for  the  articulation  with  the 
pterygoid  as  it  moves  with  the  movement  of  the  lower  jaw. 

"Prootics.  The  prootics  are  two  bones  between  the  basisphenoid,  basioc- 
cipital,  paraoccipital  and  supraoccipital  bones.  In  the  adult  the  sutures  are  not 
clearly  visible. 

Tvrasphenoid  (presphenoid).  The  parasphenoid  is  continuous  with  the 
basisphenoid  and  extends  forward  to  the  prevomers  and  palatines.  This  bone 
has  been  homologized  with  the  vomers  of  mammals.  This  element  in  these 
lizards  is  cartilaginous  and  forms  the  ventral  support  for  the  interorbital 
septum.  The  space  in  which  this  is  located  is  called  the  interpterygoidal  space. 
It  is  impossible  to  see  where  it  unites  with  the  ethmoid  or  sphenethmoid  in 
prepared  skulls. 

"Quadrates.  The  quadrates  are  two  conspicuous  bones  at  the  posterior 
and  lateral  surfaces  of  the  skull,  articulating  directly  with  the  pterygoid  on 
the  ventroanterior  surface;  with  the  paroccipital,  supratemporal  and  squamosal 
on  the  dorsal  and  posterior  border.  Each  quadrate  is  concave  on  its  ventral 
posterior  surface,  while  it  is  convex  anteriorly.  There  is  a  double  articular 
surface  for  the  movement  of  the  lower  jaw;  the  tympanic  membrane  and  the 
columella  are  parts  articulated  with  this  bone. 

"Pterygoids.  The  pterygoid  bones  are  long  (10  mm.)  and  extend  about  half 
the  length  of  the  entire  skull  on  the  ventral  surface.  The  anterior  portion  may 
be  considered  the  body,  which  bears  teeth  upon  its  ventral  median  surface. 
These  teeth  are  placed  in  depressions  and  seemingly  in  two  rows  of  irregular 
size  and  range  from  six  to  ten  on  each  side.  The  teeth  are  rather  heavy  and 
are  blunt  at  their  extremity.  This  bone  connects  anteriorly  with  the  palatines, 
laterally  with  the  ectopterygoids  and  the  jugals,  while  posteriorly  it  articulates 
with  the  quadrate,  and  about  its  middle  with  the  basisphenoid.  (The  posterior 
process  is  a  thin  knifebladelike  process  passing  from  the  basisphenoid  to  the 
quadrate.)  Its  articulation  with  the  ectopterygoid  is  by  a  broad,  flat  surface 
directly  under  the  ectopterygoid  bone.  The  ectopterygoid,  or  os  transversum, 
with  the  pterj-goid  process  together  produce  the  posterior  bar,  the  limit  of 
the  postpalatine  vacuity. 

"Ectopterygoids  (os  transversum  or  transpalatines) .  There  are  two  ecto- 
pterygoids, and  they  extend  from  the  maxillary  and  jugal  bones  to  the  ptery- 
goid, and  these  are  the  onty  bones  with  which  they  articulate. 

"Epipterygoids.  The  epipterygoids  are  a  pair  of  slivershaped  bones  ex- 
tending from  the  dorsal  surface  of  the  pterygoid  to  the  parietal  bone.  The 
union  with  the  pterygoid  bone  is  made  by  means  of  a  socket  in  which  the 
enlarged  end  of  the  epipterygoids  fit.  The  other  end  of  the  epipterygoid  is 
attenuated  and  meets  a  sliverlike  process  extending  down  from  the  parietal 
bone,  with  which  it  articulates. 

"Palatines.  The  palatines  are  two  in  number  and  meet  in  their  anterior 
portion.     There  are  two  plates  that  make  up  this  bone,  one  located  dorsally 


44  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

and  one  ventrally;  both  plates  are  united  along  the  lateral  margins.  The 
ventral  plate  is  nearly  flattened  and  is  continuous  with  the  broad  palatine 
process  from  the  alveolar  surface  of  the  maxillary  bone.  Posteriorly  it  is 
continuous  with  the  anterior  surface  of  the  pterygoid.  The  dorsal  plate  has 
a  somewhat  curved  surface  as  well  as  a  double  curved  margin  along  the 
median  line.  At  the  anterior  surface  of  this  plate  the  left  and  right  palatine 
bones  come  in  contact.  This  contact  is  directly  posterior  to  the  prevomer 
teeth,  which  project  back  a  little  distance  in  the  median  line.  The  dorsal 
plate  articulates  with  the  prevomers  anteriorly  while  posteriorly  it  unites 
with  the  pterygoids  as  does  the  other.  The  space  between  the  dorsal  and 
ventral  plates  of  the  palatine  bone  produces  a  passage  for  air  down  the  sides 
of  the  prevomer  to  the  nasal  passage. 

"Prevomer  {vomers,  but  not  homologous  with  the  vomer  of  mammals). 
The  prevomers  are  represented  in  this  form  by  a  single  inseparable  piece  in 
the  adult,  which  has  all  evidence  of  being  composed  of  two  distinct  parts 
united  in  a  groove  in  the  median  line.  At  the  posterior  end  of  the  plate 
near  the  median  groove  is  found  a  pair  of  toothlike  processes  that  may  be 
considered  the  homologue  of  prevomerine  teeth.  Extending  from  these  proc- 
esses forward  is  a  gentle  ridge  which  becomes  flattened  near  its  articulation 
with  the  premaxillary  bones.  At  the  extreme  anterior  end  in  the  median 
line  is  a  tubercle  with  a  cartilaginous  tip  and  a  slight  depression  on  either 
side.  Two  openings  may  be  seen  along  the  lateral  margin  next  to  the  max- 
illary bones;  these  seem  to  connect  with  a  cavity  in  the  prevomers  and  may 
be  the  opening  to  Jacobson's  organ.  Posterior  to  these  openings  and  along 
the  margin  in  the  maxillary  bone  is  a  slitlike  passage  which  is  continuous 
with  the  nasal  passage  above. 

"Premaxillary.  The  premaxillary  bones  are  two  in  number  and  are 
located  on  the  anterior  surface  of  the  upper  jaw.  There  are  two  distinctly 
separate  bones  in  this  form.  Left  and  right  elements  are  not  equal  in  size 
as  the  right  one  is  slightly  larger,  having  four  teeth  while  on  the  left  side 
only  three  are  present.  The  premaxillary  bones  articulate  dorsally  and 
posteriorly  with  the  nasal  bones,  laterally  and  posteriorly  with  the  maxillary 
bones  and  ventrally  with  the  prevomers.  The  dorsal  median  processes  form 
a  separation  between  the  external  nares. 

"Maxillaries.  The  maxillary  bones  are  elongated  bones  that  constitute 
the  outer  edge  of  the  upper  jaw  and  bear  the  majority  of  the  teeth  in  this 
region.  They  form  the  posterior  and  lateral  margin  of  the  external  nares 
and  the  lateral  margin  of  the  postpalatine  vacuity  and  lateral  margin  at 
anterior  edge  of  the  orbit  of  the  eye.  The  maxillary  articulates  with  the 
following  bones:  anteriorly  with  the  premaxillaries,  prevomers,  nasals  and 
septomaxillae ;  posteriorly  with  the  frontals,  prefrontals,  lachrymals,  jugals, 
and  ectopterygoids ;  and  medially  with  the  palatines.  The  outer  edge  of  the 
ventral  surface  of  the  maxillary  bone  is  raised  into  a  flange,  while  the  inner 
surface  is  on  a  lower  level  and  is  continuous  with  the  palatine  bone.  The 
nearly  cylindrical  teeth  are  fastened  to  the  lower  surface  of  this  bone  and  also 
to  the  raised  flange,  making  the  teeth  pleurodont  in  attachment.  Smaller 
teeth  are  visible  on  the  lower  surface  and  are  the  replacing  teeth  for  worn- 
out  older  ones. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  45 

"Jugals.  The  jugal  bones  are  narrow  bones  forming  the  angle  of  the 
upper  jaw  and  the  outer  and  posterior  margin  of  the  orbit.  The  entire  shape 
suggests  that  of  a  hockey  stick.  The  straight  handle-shaped  portion  is  fastened 
near  its  end  along  the  edge  of  the  orbit,  making  up  part  of  the  lateral  border. 
The  ventral  part  is  curved  and  meets  the  maxillary  at  its  posterior  end. 
Here  it  becomes  narrowed  to  a  very  thin  process  that  is  lodged  between  the 
maxillary,  ectopterygoid  and  lachrymal  bones.  On  its  dorsal  and  posterior 
end  it  articulates  with  the  postfrontal,  postorbital,  and  squamosal.  On  the 
ventral  surface  of  the  jaw  a  posterior  lateral  spine  is  seen  as  though  it  were  a 
continuation  of  the  upper  jaw. 

"Squamosals  (paraquadrates  of  Gaupp).  The  squamosals  as  here  identi- 
fied articulate  in  front  with  the  jugal  and  postorbital,  at  about  the  middle  of 
its  extent  with  the  parietal,  and  posteriorly  with  the  quadrate,  supratemporal 
and  paroccipitals.  It  is  a  flattened  curved  bone  forming  the  outer  border  of 
the  dorsal  surface  of  the  skull.  This  bone  is  undoubtedly  not  a  quadratojugal, 
as  the  lateral  temporal  vacuity  is  not  formed  because  of  the  disappearance  of 
the  lateral  arcade. 

"Supratemporal  (mpramastoid,  suprasquamosal,  tabular  of  Noble,  or  squa- 
mosal  of  Gaupp,  epiotic,  postparietal) .  These  bones  are  two  small,  insignificant, 
sliver-shaped  bones  located  between  the  squamosal  and  parietal  bones  later- 
ally, while  posteriorly  they  articulate  with  the  quadrate  and  paraoccipital 
processes.  They  are  never  in  contact  with  the  postorbital  and  postfrontal 
bones  in  this  form.  In  disarticulated  skulls  and  in  some  prepared  skulls  there 
is  an  additional  element  that  may  be  an  atrophied  tabular  or  quadratojugal. 
In  most  skulls  it  is  represented  as  an  aperture  on  the  quadrate  near  its  articu- 
lation with  the  squamosal  and  supratemporal  at  the  place  of  its  articulation. 

"Postfrontals.  The  postfrontal  bones  form  the  posterior  border  of  the 
orbit.  A  thin,  narrow  piece  extends  along  the  margin  of  the  frontal  bone  and 
the  orbit;  the  body  of  this  bone  is  a  nearly  leaf-shaped  element  in  contact 
with  the  parietal  medially  and  with  the  postorbital  laterally  and  with  the 
jugal  on  its  anterolateral  surface  at  the  posterior  lateral  boundary  of  the  orbit. 
Its  posterior  extremity  is  variable  both  on  left  and  right  sides  on  the  same  skull 
as  well  as  in  different  skulls. 

"Postorbitals  (postjrontals — Gaupp).  The  postorbitals,  two  small  bones 
in  this  skull,  do  not  form  part  of  the  orbit  nor  part  of  the  edge  of  the  skull. 
They  articulate  with  the  postfrontal,  squamosal,  jugal  and  by  a  slight  point 
touch  the  parietal  on  one  side  in  one  skull  studied.  Each  borders  on  the 
fontanelle  or  vacuity  on  the  dorsal  surface  of  the  skull.  Its  variation  will  be 
brought  out  in  the  comparisons  of  the  various  species  to  follow.  Ventrally  it 
presents  a  triangular  appearance. 

"Prefrontals  (lachrymals  of  mammals — Gaupp).  The  prefrontal  bones 
are  located  at  the  median  anterior  end  of  the  orbit;  they  are  inseparably 
united  with  the  lachrymal  bone,  articulating  with  the  frontal,  maxillary  and 
lachrymals.  A  part  of  the  suture  remaining  suggests  the  place  of  union  with 
the  lachrymal.  A  marked  ridge  and  a  groove  just  below  shows  the  point  of 
attachment  of  the  small  supraocular  bone,  which  is  found  in  careful  prepara- 
tions.   It  is  easily  removed  with  the  skin  unless  extra  care  is  used. 

"Lachrymals.    The  lachrymal  bones  are  at  the  anterior  extremity  of  the 


46  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

orbit  and  are,  as  previously  stated,  fused  in  the  adult  with  the  postfrontals. 
Each  is  characterized  in  this  form  by  having  a  foramen  penetrating  it  from 
the  orbital  side  into  the  nasal  cavity,  and  articulates  with  the  maxillae,  jugals, 
and  prefrontals. 

"Nasals.  The  nasal  bones  form  part  of  the  septum  between  the  external 
nares  as  well  as  part  of  the  posterior  boundary  of  the  same.  These  bones 
are  thin  plates  nearly  ovoid  in  shape,  with  their  anterior  median  extremities 
covered  by  the  dorsoposterior  projections  of  the  premaxillary  bones.  Posteri- 
orly they  articulate  with  the  frontals  and  laterally  with  the  maxillae.  The 
small  septomaxillae  probably  do  not  come  in  contact  with  this  element,  but 
do  with  the  maxillary  bone. 

"Stapes.  The  stapes  are  thin  cylindrical  bones  that  fit  into  the  foramen 
ovale  of  the  paroccipital  process.  They  pass  out  posteriorly  to  the  quadrate, 
where  they  seem  to  be  strengthened  in  their  position  by  this  bone  and  by 
the  tympanic  membrane  on  the  outer  surface  of  the  head." 

Dentary.  This  element  extends  posteriorly  almost  to  the  middle 
of  the  base  of  the  coronoid  on  its  lower  surface.  It  bears  22 
pleurodent  teeth  which  point  upward  and  outward,  the  extreme  tips 
being  slightly  recurved;  the  upper  inner  face  of  the  bone  has  a 
beaded  rim,  forming  a  trough  at  the  base  of  the  toothrow. 

Splenial.  This  bone  is  elongate,  extending  as  far  back  as  the 
dentary.  Anteriorly  it  borders  an  elongate  foramen  and  has  another 
small  foramen  near  its  anterior  end.  It  does  not  reach  the  edge  of 
the  beaded  inner  side  of  the  dentary. 

Coronoid.  The  upper  free  edge  of  the  coronoid  is  elevated  about 
a  millimeter  above  the  ramus,  with  a  forward  projecting  base  which 
meets  and  forms  a  posterior  continuation  of  the  beaded  inner  edge  of 
the  dentary.  The  inner  free  edge  is  raised  above  the  inner  level 
of  the  ramus.  There  is  no  posterior  projection,  and  only  a  slight 
projection  forward  on  the  outer  face  of  the  ramus.  On  the  inner 
face  of  the  ramus,  the  lower  edge  of  the  coronoid  forms  a  semicircle. 

SuRANGULARE.  This  element  is  rather  extensive  on  the  outer 
posterior  face  of  the  ramus.  It  is  notched  somewhat  by  the  angulare 
posteriorly. 

Angulare.  This  element  shows  a  short  anterior  notch  in  which 
is  inserted  the  posterior  lower  part  of  the  dentary;  a  similar  notch 
occurs  in  the  posterior  border. 

Prearticulare.  This  narrow  element  extends  forward  to  the 
anterior  lower  part  of  the  coronoid  and  appears  to  be  (at  least 
partially)  free  from  the  articulare. 

Articulare.  The  upper  surface  of  the  articulare  has  several 
ridges  and  depressions,  the  anterior  part  of  the  articular  surface 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  47 

raised,  forming  an  elevation  somewhat  less  in  height  than  the  coro- 
noid  projection;  the  posterior  part  of  this  element  is  thin  and 
flattened. 

Sternum  and  Ribs.  The  anterior  edges  of  the  sternum  form  a 
right  angle,  the  edges  strongly  grooved  longitudinally.  The  posterior 
edges  are  scalloped.  Two  posterior  foramina  are  present.  The  ribs 
of  the  ninth,  tenth,  and  eleventh  vertebrae  join  the  sternum.  The 
xiphisternum  is  elongate,  divided  throughout  its  length,  forming  two 
equal  moieties.  Ribs  from  the  twelfth  vertebra  attach  near  the 
middle,  those  from  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  attach  at  the 
posterior  end  of  the  xiphisternum.  The  ribs  following  are  free, 
their  terminal  joint  curving  inwards. 

Vertebral  Column.  There  are  eight  vertebrae  anterior  to  those 
with  ribs  attaching  to  the  sternum.  The  epistropheus  is  large,  with 
a  large  spine,  which  is  much  lengthened,  having  both  an  anterior 
and  a  posterior  projection.  The  other  vertebrae  have  a  rather 
narrow  posterior  spine.  The  first  vertebra  following  the  epistro- 
pheus apparently  lacks  ribs;  those  of  the  next  three  with  short, 
flattened  ribs,  while  on  the  two  following  the  ribs  are  elongate  and 
slender.  There  are  nineteen  thoraco-lumbar  vertebrae,  all  bearing 
ribs.  Two  fused  sacral  vertebrae  are  present,  their  processes  some- 
wrhat  widened  distally.  Chevron  bones  begin  on  the  fourth  caudal 
vertebra. 

Pectoral  Girdle  and  Forelimb.  The  interclavicle  is  in  the  form 
of  a  maltese  cross,  the  lateral  wings  narrow,  not  widened  at  their 
bases;  the  anterior  wing  reaches  as  far  forward  as  the  anterior 
edges  of  the  clavicles  on  their  under  side.  Clavicles  meeting  on 
median  line,  where  they  are  slightly  widened  with  one  or  two  some- 
what mediad  fenestrae.  The  bone  then  narrows  slightly  and  then 
widens  again  at  the  angle  of  the  bone.  It  then  becomes  much 
narrowed  when  it  joins  the  suprascapula.  This  latter  element  is 
narrowed  at  the  point  of  contact  with  the  scapula,  but  is  much 
widened  distally.  The  scapula  is  broad  at  the  point  of  contact  with 
the  suprascapula;  and  then  it  narrow's  considerably  where  it  fuses 
with  the  coracoid.  The  precoracoid  and  supracoracoid  are  fused 
with  the  coracoid.  The  epicoracoid  cartilage  borders  the  medial 
edge  of  the  combined  coracoid,  and  helps  inclose  two  large,  nearly 
equal-sized,  fenestrae,  the  outer  of  which  may  not  be  completely 
inclosed.  The  forelimb  is  well  developed.  The  humerus  is  dis- 
tinctly longer  than  the  radius  or  ulna.    The  ulnare  and  radiale  are 


48  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

large,  articulating  directly  with  the  lower  ends  of  ulna  and  radius 
respectively.  The  centrale  is  present,  but  the  intermedium  is  prob- 
ably wanting  or  fused  with  another  element;  five  carpalia  are 
present.  The  pisiforme  is  somewhat  ventral  to  the  end  of  the  ulna. 
The  formula  for  the  phalanges  is:  2-3-4-5-3.  The  middle  finger 
is  slightly  the  longest. 

Pelvic  Girdle  and  Hind  Limb.  The  ilia  are  directed  backward 
in  contact  with  two  sacral  vertebrae.  The  pubic  bones  are  narrow, 
forming  a  right  angle  at  the  symphysis.  Near  the  junction  of  the 
pubis  with  the  ischium  there  is  a  narrow,  very  strongly  curved 
ventral  process.  The  ischial  symphysis  is  somewhat  elongate,  the 
bones  being  wider  at  this  point  than  elsewhere,  forming  a  forward 
projecting  point.  The  foramen  cordiforme  is  very  large.  Each 
ischium  has  a  small  posterior  projection.  I  cannot  find  an  os  hypo- 
ischium  in  this  species  and  believe  that  it  is  normally  wanting. 

The  femur  is  heavy,  and  slightly  longer  than  the  tibia.  Between 
the  articulation  of  the  femur  with  the  fibula  is  a  small  rounded 
sesamoid  (patella)  and  two  small  sesamoid  elements  about  the 
ventral  side  of  the  articulation  of  the  femur  and  the  tibia.  The 
astragalus  and  calcaneum  are  fused.  There  are  only  two  tarsalia 
present.    The  phalangeal  formula  is:    2-3-4-5-4. 

The  characters  of  the  bony  elements  vary  somewhat  in  the  various 
species.  Kingman  (1932)  discusses  variation  in  the  cranial  ele- 
ments. These  differences  do  not  involve  the  loss  of  any  elements, 
nor  the  presence  of  added  elements.  He  notes  some  differences  in 
relationship  of  the  bones,  and  in  the  size  of  fenestrae,  number  of 
teeth,  and  proportions  of  various  skull  elements.  My  skeletal  ma- 
terial other  than  skulls  is  so  limited  that  at  this  time  I  have  not 
made  a  comparative  study  of  the  skeletons  of  the  various  species. 

GENERAL  DISTRIBUTION 

The  present  distribution  of  the  genus  Eumeces  is  probably  more 
restricted  than  formerly,  since  there  are  four  discontinuous  areas 
now  occupied.  These  are:  An  area  in  the  western  hemisphere  com- 
prising the  southern  edge  of  Canada,  the  United  States,  Mexico  and 
part  of  Central  America;  the  isolated  Bermuda  Islands;  an  area 
comprising  the  northern  edge  of  Africa  and  part  of  southwestern 
Asia;  and  a  fourth  area  including  part  of  southeastern  Asia  and 
the  island  arcs  lying  to  the  east. 

It  is  probable  that  in  North  America,  during  glacial  periods, 
species  have  been  forced  to  the  south.    At  the  present  time  it  seems 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


49 


probable  that  they  are  pushing  farther  north.  Their  absence  from 
Europe  is  probably  due  to  glaciation;  and  their  present  restricted 
distribution  in  Africa  is  due  to  limitation  by  the  desert.  The  break 
in  the  continuity  of  their  distribution  in  Asia  seems  to  be  caused  by 
desert  and  plateau  factors.  I  offer  no  explanation  of  the  species  on 
the  isolated  Bermuda  Islands. 


Fig.  3    Distribution  of  the  genus  Eumeces  Wiegmann. 

MEXICAN  AND  CENTRAL  AMERICAN  FORMS 

Mexico  and  Central  America  have  no  less  than  eight  of  the  fifteen 
groups  recognized  in  this  work,  all  occurring  in  the  Mexican  terri- 
tory, while  only  two  enter  Central  America.  The  Skiltonianus, 
Obsoletus  and  Anthracinus  groups  are  largely  American  in  distri- 
bution, although  the  latter  extends  as  far  south  as  the  plateau  itself, 
if  the  species  Eumeces  copei  is  properly  associated  with  this  group, 
a  matter  about  which  there  may  be  some  doubt.  The  territory 
occupied  by  this  species  is  not  contiguous  with  that  of  other  mem- 
bers of  the  group. 

The  Schwartzei  and  Sumichrasti  groups  are  south  Mexican  and 
Central  American  in  distribution  and  are  confined  to  territory  bor- 
dering the  southern  part  of  the  Mexican  Plateau,  or  lying  to  the 
south  of  the  plateau. 

The  Lynxe  group  belongs  to  the  high  plateau  region,  as  does 
4—1123 


50  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

largely  the  Brevirostris  group.  Certain  species,  at  least,  in  both 
of  these  groups  have  developed  ovoviviparity.  The  Brevilineatus 
group  appears  to  occupy  territory  in  both  lowland  and  highland 
regions,  some  species  being  adapted  to  both  habitats. 

The  factors  governing  the  distribution  of  certain  of  the  various 
species  of  the  genus  in  Mexico  are  indeed  obscure,  the  usual  con- 
trolling factors  of  elevation,  temperature  and  barriers  being  in  a 
large  measure  disregarded,  since  at  least  certain  of  the  known  forms 
occur  in  the  plateau  region  and  in  the  low  coastal  region  as  well. 
Certain  forms  occupy  restricted  areas,  and  others  are  widespread. 
Each  species  apparently  must  be  regarded  as  a  law  unto  itself,  and 
considered  individually. 

The  most  distinctive  forms  of  this  fauna  are  those  belonging  to 
the  Schwartzei  group:  schwartzei,  managuae  and  altamirani.  The 
two  latter  species,  known  as  yet  from  only  one  or  two  specimens, 
offer  little  data  save  that  managuae  is  from  low  elevation  on  the 
shore  of  Lake  Managua,  while  the  type  locality  of  altamirani  is 
"regiones  calidades  del  Estado  de  Michoacan"  (presumably  near 
Apatzingan) ,  which  lies  south  of  the  plateau  edge.  The  records  for 
schwartzei  show  it  to  be  a  lowland  form ;  the  type  locality,  a  small 
island  in  Laguna  de  Terminos,  Campeche,  is  near  sea  level.  These 
three  form  a  compact  group  whose  closest  relatives,  judging  by  scale 
characters,  may  be  western  Asiatic  forms. 

The  type  locality  of  E.  sumichrasti,  placed  in  a  group  of  the  same 
name,  is  usually  accepted  as  Orizaba,  Vera  Cruz.  Whether  this 
refers  to  the  neighborhood  of  the  mountain,  to  the  town,  or  is  an 
error,  cannot  be  stated,  since  the  specimens  collected  by  Ferdinand 
Sumichrast  did  not  always  bear  accurate  labels.  In  his  own  report 
of  the  species  he  mentioned  finding  it  at  an  elevation  of  590  meters 
"en  los  encinales  de  Portrero"  near  Cordova.  A  record  for  Jalapa 
is  the  only  one  from  a  high  elevation.  Other  reports  of  the  species, 
from  Vera  Cruz,  Mineral  de  Santa  Fe,  Chiapas  (E.  rovirosae  Duges) 
and  Lancetilla  and  Tela,  Honduras  {E.  schmidti  Dunn),  are  all  from 
sea  level  or  relatively  low  localities. 

Save  for  the  detail  of  the  color  pattern  on  the  head,  the  species 
resembles  to  a  considerable  degree  the  five-lined  forms  of  south- 
eastern United  States,  and  in  my  opinion  is  a  distant  relative.  This 
is  based  on  the  conformation  of  the  scales,  the  five-lined  color 
pattern,  and  the  character  of  the  pits  on  the  scales,  as  well  as  body 
proportions.  At  no  point,  however,  are  their  known  ranges  con- 
tiguous. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  51 

I  have  recently  described  and  named  Eumeces  copei,  a  species 
long  known  from  a  brief  description  by  Cope  (1885),  but  associated 
with  another  species  (brevirostris)  as  a  variety  without  a  name. 
This  form  occurs  in  the  highland  region,  maintaining  an  elevation 
from  about  5,000  to  10,000  feet,  wherever  it  has  been  found.  It 
exhibits  certain  color  characters  common  to  septentrionalis  and  an- 
thracinus,  but  differs  in  the  general  character  of  the  dorsal  scales, 
as  well  as  in  the  details  of  the  color  pattern.  The  relationship,  if 
properly  diagnosed,  is  more  distant  than  obtains  among  the  other 
members  of  the  anthracinus  group. 

In  the  central  southern  highland  region,  occupying  territory  in 
San  Luis  Potosi.  Guanajuato,  Queretaro,  Hidalgo,  Vera  Cruz  and 
Tlaxcala,  is  a  small  group  consisting  of  two  closely  related  forms, 
lynxe  and  furcirostris.  These  small,  five-lined  forms,  with  the 
median  line  forking  on  the  anterior  part  of  the  frontal,  seem  to  be 
confined  to  the  high  plateau  region,  and  their  relationship  with  other 
groups  is  not  clear.  Numerous  characters  lacking  in  lynxe  seem 
to  suggest  also  a  relationship  not  only  with  the  five-lined  forms  of 
the  Fasciatus  group,  but  also  with  the  Brevilineatus  group,  the 
members  of  which  have  lost  all  but  the  anterior  part  of  the  median 
line.  They  agree  in  the  character  of  the  scale  pits.  However,  the 
members  of  the  Lynxe  group  are  ovoviviparous. 

The  species  obsoletus,  which  is  apparently  closely  related  to 
chinensis,  occurs  in  the  northern  part  of  Mexico.  Specimens  have 
been  collected  in  northern  Tamaulipas  and  northern  Chihuahua. 
The  range  in  Mexico  must  be  much  greater  than  these  two  records 
show.  I  have  taken  specimens  in  the  southern  part  of  Brewster 
county,  Texas,  within  ten  miles  of  the  borders  of  Coahuila,  and  in 
the  Huachuca  mountains  of  Arizona,  within  two  miles  of  the  bound- 
ary of  Sonora.  So  one  is  safe  in  prophesying  its  discovery  in  these 
northern  Mexican  states.  This  species  occupies  habitats  from  sea 
level  (at  Matamoros,  Tamaulipas)  to  elevations  of  8,000  feet  in 
the  Chisos  mountains  of  Texas;  from  open  hillsides  in  the  wooded 
region  of  eastern  Kansas  to  the  semidesert  areas  of  Arizona  and 
Chihuahua.     It  wrould  appear  to  be  a  very  adaptable  form. 

The  remaining  forms  known  from  Mexico  have  been  placed  into 
four  groups:  the  Brevirostris,  Brevilineatus,  Multivirgatus  and  Skil- 
tonianus  groups,  the  latter  known  from  Baja  California  in  Mexico. 

The  Brevilineatus.  group  is  represented  by  three  species  (brevi- 
lineatus, tetragrammus  and  callicephalus) ,  all  three  of  which  occupy 
areas  on  either  side  of  the  boundary,  only  one,  callicephalus  (which 


52  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

reaches  the  state  of  Guanajuato),  extending  any  considerable  dis- 
tance to  the  south.  In  the  north  (and  considerably  modified  from 
the  typical)  callicephalus  reaches  the  Gila  river  in  Arizona.  A 
vertical  range  of  about  6,000  feet  is  evidenced. 

Three  representatives  of  the  Midtivirgatus  group  are  known.  In 
western  Mexico,  in  the  state  of  Nayarit,  is  a  small  species  known 
from  three  specimens  which  I  have  recently  described  under  the  name 
parvulus;  from  Sonora  another  diminutive  species,  parviauriculatus, 
has  been  recently  described;  while  a  third,  a  variant  of  multi- 
virgatus, is  known  from  Sonora,  New  Mexico  and  Texas. 

The  Skiltonianus  group  extends  from  British  Columbia  through- 
out Washington,  Oregon,  Idaho,  Nevada  and  Utah,  occupying  only 
the  western  part  of  Arizona,  narrowing  its  range  in  the  south  so  that 
it  enters  Mexico  only  in  Baja  California.  As  yet  no  species  of  those 
I  have  assigned  to  this  group  are  known  to  occur  in  any  other  of 
the  northern  tier  of  Mexican  states. 

In  Baja  California  three  species  are  known:  S.  skiltonianus, 
gilberti  rubricaudatus  and  lagunensis,  the  two  former  entering  and 
occupying  together  the  proximal  end  of  the  peninsula.  Lagunensis 
occurs  in  the  more  distal  parts.  The  probabilities  that  the  ranges  of 
skiltonianus  and  lagunensis  overlap  are  small.  Despite  certain 
museum  records  skiltonianus*  is  not  known  in  other  parts  of  Mexico. 

The  southern  part  of  the  plateau  region  is  inhabited  by  two 
closely  related  species,  indubitus  and  dugesii,  of  the  Brevirostris 
group,  the  former  occupying  more  southeastern  territory  than  the 
latter,  and  differing  from  the  latter  in  having  four  instead  of  three 
supraoculars,  a  divergence  parallel  to  that  which  obtains  between 
lynxe  and  furcirostris.  Whether  their  territories  actually  overlap 
without  intergradation  is  not  known,  although  typical  specimens  of 
each  apparently  occur  in  Michoacan.  The  known  distribution  of 
dugesii  is  Guanajuato  and  Michoacan;  that  of  indubitus,  Morelos, 
Mexico  and  eastern  Michoacan.  Duges'  record  for  Chiapas  is  not 
substantiated  by  any  known  specimen  in  museums.  Brevirostris 
occupies  a  considerable  part  of  the  highlands  of  southern  Mexico. 
The  species  as  here  recognized  is  somewhat  variable,  and  lack  of 
sufficient  material  the  cause  of  my  failure  to  recognize  certain  of 
the  variants  subspecifically.    The  species  is  known  from  Vera  Cruz, 

*  A  specimen  in  the  Harvard  Museum  of  Eumeces  skiltonianus  purports  to  come  from 
Acapuleo,  Guerrero,  collected  by  a  ship's  captain,  H.  Davis.  The  specimen  is  properly 
identified,  but  is  typical  of  individuals  from  the  neighborhood  of  San  Francisco.  If  the 
specimen  was  actually  obtained  in  Acapuleo,  it  had  doubtless  been  carried  there  from  some 
port  in  the  western  United  States.  The  lower  jaw  has  been  pierced  near  the  symphysis  as  if 
a  string  had  been  inserted  for  holding  the  animal.  I  am  reluctant  to  accept  the  evidence  of 
its  presence  in  Guerrero  on  the  basis  of  this  specimen.  Certain  other  museum  records  for 
southern  Mexico  are  based  on  specimens  of  brevirostris. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  53 

Oaxaca,  Puebla,  Durango,  Colima  and  Jalisco.  With  added  material 
certain  of  these  forms  may  be  profitably  separated  as  subspecies. 

Three  other  forms  are  tentatively  associated  with  this  group: 
ochoterenae  from  Guerrero,  colimensis  from  Colima  and  dicei  from 
Tamaulipas.  The  last  two  are  known  only  from  type  specimens; 
ochoterenae  from  a  series  of  eleven  specimens. 

It  is  self-evident  that  exact  limits  of  distribution  of  most  species 
cannot  at  this  time  be  plotted,  and  conclusions  based  on  present 
inadequate  data  may  have  to  be  thrown  into  the  discard  both  as 
to  specific  limits  of  forms,  and  the  interpretation  of  their  relation- 
ships, when  future  collections  shall  present  a  clearer  picture  of 
variation. 

The  presence  of  the  genus  in  Central  America  has  only  recently 
been  demonstrated  through  the  discovery  by  Harry  Malleis  of  E. 
schwartzei  at  Peten,  Guatamala  (three  specimens) ;  of  E.  sumi- 
chrasti  (E.  schmidti  Dunn)  by  J.  A.  G.  Rehn  at  Lancetilla  and  Tela, 
Honduras,  in  1930  (two  specimens)  ;  and  the  still  more  recent  dis- 
covery of  a  distinctive  new  species,  E.  managuae  Dunn,  at  the 
aviation  field  in  Managua,  Nicaragua,  by  James  H.  Ivy  (one  speci- 
men). These  three  species,  represented  by  six  specimens,  are  the 
only  known  representatives  of  the  genus  south  of  the  Mexican 
boundary.  Conjecture  as  to  whether  future  collections  will  prove 
the  presence  of  Eumeces  in  South  America  is  futile. 

CANADIAN    AND    AMERICAN    FORMS 

The  general  distribution  of  the  genus  in  this  territory  is  from 
southern  Canada,  south  to  the  Mexican  boundary  and  Gulf  of 
Mexico.  In  Canada  the  genus  is  authentically  reported  from 
southern  British  Columbia,  Manitoba  and  Ontario;  and  perhaps  also 
from  Nova  Scotia.  It  is  highly  probable  that  species  occur  in  certain 
other  border  provinces.  Only  three  species  are  known.  Eumeces 
skiltonianus  is  the  western  form,  septentrionalis  septentrionalis,  the 
central  form,  while  fasciatas  is  found  in  the  east.  Eumeces  septen- 
trionalis septentrionalis  has  been  reported  from  Canada  for  the  first 
time  as  recently  as  April,  1934. 

In  the  United  States  species  are  known  from  all  the  states  except 
Montana  and  four  New  England  states:  (Vermont,  Rhode  Island, 
New  Hampshire  and  Maine).  The  apparent  absence  from  these 
states  lends  doubt  to  Cope's  (1900)  record  from  Nova  Scotia.  When 
more  extensive  herpetological  collections  are  made  in  Montana,  the 
presence  of  skiltonianus  will  doubtless  be  demonstrated.  However, 
the  likelihood  of  extending  the  range  of  fasciatus  into  northern  New 


54  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

England  may  be  doubted,  since  here,  it  would  appear,  there  has  not 
been  the  dearth  of  effort  in  collecting  as  obtains  in  Montana. 

In  the  United  States  and  Canada  representatives  of  six  of  the 
fifteen  recognized  groups  occur,  each  occupying  a  limited  region, 
none  covering  the  entire  territory. 

The  Egregius  group  occupies  the  most  restricted  territory.  It  is 
known  only  from  peninsular  Florida  and  the  Florida  Keys.  A 
single  specimen  has  been  taken  in  the  southern  part  of  Georgia. 
The  group  shares  this  territory  with  three  members  of  the  Fasciatus 
group — laticeps,  inexpectatus  and  fasciatus.  This  latter  group  is 
widespread,  occupying  the  eastern  half  of  the  United  States  and  the 
adjoining  Canadian  territory,  the  species  being  restricted  in  the 
west  apparently  by  the  reduced  rainfall  and  consequent  limitation  of 
forests.     This  north-south  line  approximates  the  97th  meridian. 

The  Anthracinus  group,  which  in  a  considerable  measure  occupies 
the  same  territory  as  the  Fasciatus  group,  seems  likewise  to  be 
limited  in  the  west  by  reduced  rainfall.  Anthracinus  appears  to  be 
rare  (or  absent)  without  reason  from  the  central  eastern  states. 

A  north-south  line  following  roughly  the  93d  meridian  in  Kansas 
and  Oklahoma,  then  moving  somewhat  farther  to  the  west  in  Texas, 
marks  the  eastern  boundary  of  the  Obsoletus  group,  represented  in 
America  by  a  single  species,  obsoletus.  In  the  northern  part  of 
the  range  it  does  not  reach  the  Rocky  Mountains,  but  in  the  south 
it  extends  across  Texas  and  New  Mexico  to  Sonora,  and  north  to 
Utah. 

The  Multivirgatus  group  extends  from  western  Nebraska  south 
through  Colorado,  New  Mexico  and  Arizona,  in  which  territory  it 
is  represented  by  three  small  species. 

Approximately  the  western  third  of  the  United  States  (including 
the  adjacent  territory  in  Canada  and  extending  to  the  tip  of  Baja 
California)  is  occupied  by  members  of  the  Skiltonianus  group.  In 
this  group  are  five  forms  which,  while  having  considerable  similarity 
in  squamation  of  head  and  body,  and  in  the  young  similar  color 
patterns  except  on  the  tails,  are  very  different  in  size  and  in  the 
evolution  of  the  color  pattern  in  adults.  One  form  of  gilberti  is 
apparently  a  high  mountain  form,  being  most  common  in  the  high 
Sierras  in  California,  while  the  other,  rubricaudatus,  appears  to  be 
in  the  San  Joaquin  Valley  and  the  lower  ridges  to  the  south.  I 
would  regard  it  as  highly  probable  that  these  forms  were  originally 
separated  by  a  water  barrier  and  developed  through  isolation,  but 
now  that  the  water  barrier  has  vanished,  the  differences  may  be 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  55 

vanishing  also.  The  variation  that  obtains  between  the  northern 
skiltomanus  and  specimens  occurring  in  the  northern  part  of  Baja 
California  and  southern  California  suggest  that  perhaps  a  similar 
condition  obtained;  that  is,  a  separation  of  the  southern  territory 
as  an  island,  and  the  consequent  development  of  a  form  having  the 
reduced  interparietal  inclosed  by  parietals.  With  the  union  of  this 
territory  to  the  mainland  the  intermingling  of  the  forms  has  con- 
tinued until  the  line  of  separation  has  become  largely  obliterated. 
Lagunensis  in  the  south  may  have  developed  due  to  isolation  by  a 
desert  barrier  rather  than  by  a  water  barrier. 

The  Brevilineatus  group  is  largely  Mexican  in  distribution,  but 
extends  into  the  United  States  in  all  the  border  states  save  Cali- 
fornia. These  medium-sized  species  are  apparently  related  to  the 
Fasciatus  group. 

EASTERN  ASIATIC  FORMS 

The  eastern  Asiatic  species  fall  readily  into  three  groups:  the 
Obsoletus  group  containing  kishinouyei,  chinensis  chinensis,  and 
chinensis  pulcher;  the  Fasciatus  group  containing  elegans,  xanthi 
and  tunganus  on  the  continent  and  stimsonii,  barbouri,  oshimensis, 
marginatus,  latiscutatus  and  okadae  on  the  islands  of  the  east  coast; 
and  a  third  group  represented  by  a  single  species,  quadrilineatus. 
The  first  two  mentioned  groups  have  representatives  in  North 
America.    The  last  species  is  confined  to  southeastern  Asia. 

The  discontinuity  in  the  distribution  of  the  genus  across  Asia 
seems  to  be  actual  rather  than  merely  apparent.  The  area  oc- 
cupied by  the  northern  desert  of  Gobi,  the  Tibetan  Plateau  and  the 
heavily  forested  regions  of  great  rainfall  in  India  and  Burma,  lacks 
known  species.  It  may  be  that  in  these  regions  where  limited 
herpetological  exploration  has  been  accomplished,  unknown  Eumeces 
await  discovery,  which  will  lessen  the  hiatus  that  separates  the 
eastern  Asiatic  species  from  those  in  western  Asia.  The  fact  that 
the  latter  area  is  populated  by  members  of  two  groups  most  dis- 
tantly related  to  the  eastern  groups,  suggests  that  the  barrier  is  real 
and  is  not  crossed  by  the  genus. 

The  striking  similarity  between  American  and  Asiatic  species  of 
the  Fasciatus  group  bespeaks  a  close  relationship — a  relationship 
dependent  no  doubt  upon  a  former  continuity  of  the  territory 
occupied  by  the  group. 

I  regard  eastern  North  America  as  the  most  probable  place  of 
origin  of  this  group,  and  the  form  fasciatus  as  the  most  primitive  of 
its  living  species  (most  generalized  type).    I  do  not  adhere  to  the 


56  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

postulate  that  would  place  the  most  primitive  form  farthest  from 
point  of  origin  in  this  case.  It  is  widely  distributed;  occupies  a 
variety  of  habitats;  endures  wide  ranges  of  temperature  (not  of 
elevation)  and  competes  with  one  or  two  derivative  forms  through- 
out a  good  portion  of  its  range. 

I  regard  migration  from  North  America  to  Asia  as  having  taken 
place  via  land  bridges  joining  the  Alaskan  peninsula  with  Asia 
either  at  Bering  Straits  or  via  the  Aleutian  Island  arc  to  Kamchatka, 
or  both.  One  would  need  postulate  but  slight  climatic  changes, 
since  the  present  climate  of  this  coastal  region  is  probably  no  more 
rigorous  than  that  of  southern  Canada,  which  has  three  species  of 
the  genus. 

I  do  not  hold  that  the  land  bridge  so  built  would  include  the 
Kuriles,  the  larger  islands  to  the  south,  or  the  Riu  Kius.  The  mode 
of  speciation  in  these  islands  is  linear,  much  as  would  be  the  case 
did  they  form  a  continuum  with  America.  However,  there  is  certain 
evidence  which  seems  to  preclude  the  above  possibility. 

What  does  seem  to  be  the  most  reasonable  explanation  of  the 
present  distribution  is  that  the  island  groups  beginning  with  For- 
mosa, Riu  Kius,  etc.,  were  formerly  a  peninsula  jutting  from  the 
mainland  from  Fukien  (rather  than  from  Korea  or  Kamchatka) . 

The  following  facts  seem  to  support  this  postulate:  1.  The  genus 
is  absent  from  the  northernmost  island  group  (Kuriles) . 

2.  Two  groups  are  present  on  the  southern  islands  nearer  the 
mainland. 

3.  Species  of  both  the  Fasciatus  and  Obsoletus  groups  in  For- 
mosa and  Pescadores  islands  are  so  little  changed  that  subspecific 
designations  appear  to  be  unwarranted. 

4.  There  is  a  gradual  diminution  in  the  character  of  the  irregular 
patch  of  scales  on  the  posterior  side  of  the  femur,  and  it  becomes 
lost  in  the  northernmost  forms. 

5.  The  most  northern  Chinese  species  is  xanthi,  and  it  is  more 
distantly  related  to  latiscutatus,  occurring  on  the  northern  islands, 
than  to  elegans,  which  is  more  southern  in  distribution. 

The  location  of  the  sole  member  of  the  Quadrilineatus  group 
(Eumeces  quadrilineatus)  in  the  southern  part  of  China  suggests 
that  its  relationship,  if  any,  with  the  four-lined  Skiltonianus  group 
in  America  is  very  remote.  It  probably  represents  one  of  the  more 
ancient  forms  of  the  genus,  a  presumption  supported  by  the  fact 
that  only  a  small  number  of  specimens  are  in  museums,  betokening 
an  actual  rarity  of  individuals,  a  rather  limited  distribution,  and  its 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  57 

present  isolation.  In  the  case  of  all  presumably  ancient  species 
the  number  of  individuals  that  have  been  taken  is  relatively  small; 
in  the  case  of  the  presumed  more  recent  species,  particularly  mem- 
bers of  the  Skiltonianiis  and  Fasciatus  groups,  the  numbers  of 
individuals  taken  are  large.  The  possibility  that  this  is  due  to 
some  other  cause  has  not  been  overlooked. 

AFRICAN  AND  WESTERN  ASIATIC  FORMS 

A  review  of  the  localities  at  which  species  of  the  genus  have  been 
taken  in  Africa  shows  that  the  genus  follows  the  northern  coast  of 
the  continent  from  southwestern  Morocco  to  the  upper  borders  of 
the  Red  Sea,  at  no  place  reaching  a  distance  greater  than  about  500 
miles  from  the  coast.  This  is  roughly  the  African  territory  assigned 
to  the  Mediterranean  Region.  The  limiting  factor  would  appear 
to  be  the  Sahara  desert.  Elsewhere  members  of  the  genus  seem  to 
have  been  able  to  adapt  themselves  to  regions  where  semidesert 
conditions  prevail,  quite  as  well  as  to  moist  wooded  regions,  but 
none  are  known  in  true  deserts. 

The  territory  occupied  seems  to  follow  the  characteristic  lines 
mapped  by  Engler  for  the  Mediterranean  (botanical)  Region. 
Schmidt  (Herpetology  of  the  Belgian  Congo)  has  suggested  that 
plant  distribution  is  indeed  a  vital  factor  in  determining  the  dis- 
tribution of  African  animals.  However,  that  the  external  physical 
factors  limiting  plant  life  would  also  directly  affect  animal  distri- 
bution is  obvious. 

In  western  Asia  the  genus  is  limited  in  distribution.  To  the  east 
it  reaches  and  covers  western  India  and  approaches  Tibet,  but  in 
these  regions  encounters  barriers  of  three  types:  to  the  north,  the 
deserts;  in  the  central  region,  the  high,  cold  plateau  of  Tibet;  while 
in  the  south  the  tropical  character  of  the  country,  with  heavy  rain- 
fall, seems  to  prove  an  impassable  barrier  to  a  further  extension  of 
the  range.  To  the  south  it  doubtless  reaches  the  coastline  save  in 
the  region  of  the  Arabian  desert. 

To  the  north  the  cause  of  limitation  is  not  clear.  One  would  ex- 
pect the  whole  of  Asia  Minor,  and  the  region  south  of  the  Caucasus 
Mountains  to  be  occupied,  but  so  far  as  collections  go  this  is  not 
true.  The  northern  distribution  farther  east  includes  Turkestan 
and  Eastern  Turkestan  (Yarkand),  but  I  believe  no  records  show 
species  occurring  farther  north  than  the  Aral  Sea. 

Two  groups  of  the  genus,  Schneiderii  and  Taeniolatus,  occur  in 
this  territory.     The  former  is  represented  by  several  species,  ex- 


58  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

tending  over  the  entire  territory  with  the  exception  of  the  extreme 
northeastern  part,  while  the  Taeniolatus  group,  represented  by  a 
single  species,  reaches  no  further  west  than  Arabia,  and  does  not 
cover  the  entire  territory  occupied  by  the  Schneiderii  group.  It 
does  not  occur  on  Cyprus,  the  eastern  Mediterranean  island  which 
is  occupied  by  a  member  of  the  Schneiderii  group;  nor  does  it  reach 
Africa. 

Whether  the  hiatus  in  the  Asiatic  distribution  in  the  north-south 
central  region  (including  Mongolia,  Tibet,  peninsular  and  eastern 
India,  Burma,  Siam  and  the  Malay  Peninsula)  is  real  or  only  ap- 
parent, due  to  lack  of  collecting,  can  only  be  known  after  a  greater 
amount  of  exploration  has  been  done.  I  suspect  that  the  Gobi 
desert  to  the  north  of  Tibet  would  serve  as  an  effective  barrier  on 
the  north.     I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the  hiatus  is  a  real  one. 

It  appears  that,  despite  the  rather  marked  uniformity  of  the 
larger  head  scales,  the  Schneiderii  group  consists  of  five  or  six 
species  rather  than  the  three  recognized  by  Boulenger.  This  is 
discussed  under  the  various  forms  of  the  group. 

HABITAT  OF  EUMECES 

The  finding  and  collecting  of  the  species  of  Eumeces  is  beset  with 
many  difficulties,  and  for  a  number  of  reasons.  For  the  most  part 
these  lizards  are  very  shy,  hiding  underground  and  under  rocks  a 
good  part  of  the  day.  Their  movements  are  so  snakelike  and  noise- 
less that,  save  for  a  few  species,  the  individuals  are  rarely  observed 
save  by  digging  them  out  of  the  ground  or  exposing  them  by  lifting 
rocks. 

In  many  localities  the  number  of  individuals  appears  to  be  very 
limited,  if  one  may  judge  by  the  number  of  specimens  that  have 
reached  museums.  Whether  this  rarity  is  actual,  or  is  only  ap- 
parent, due  to  the  choice  of  habitat  and  time  and  place  of  feeding, 
I  cannot  state.  I  am  inclined  to  regard  the  latter  alternative  rather 
than  the  former  as  the  more  probable. 

The  choice  of  habitat  varies  with  the  species,  and  the  same  species 
may  be  able  to  adapt  itself  to  a  variety  of  habitats. 

Eumeces  obsoletus  is  usually  found  along  rocky  ledges  in  the 
neighborhood  of  creeks  and  streams  along  which  are  to  be  found 
some  natural  growth  of  timber.  These  ledges  may  occur  back  some 
distance  from  the  streams,  but  as  long  as  the  timber  remains  the 
species  is  present.  When  the  timber  is  cut  away,  they  may  persist 
for  some  years.     Where  the  timber  alone  is  present  E.  fasciatus 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  59 

may  be  found  occasionally  below  fallen  tree  trunks  and  under  bark 
of  fallen  trunks,  or  about  rotting  stumps  where  food  in  the  form  of 
insects  and  insect  larvae  is  plentiful.  In  Arkansas,  where  I  have 
collected,  this  was  the  more  typical  habitat.  Farther  east  it  is  often 
collected  in  the  vicinity  of  sawmills  in  and  about  the  wood  refuse. 

Only  rarely  is  this  form  seen  in  trees,  at  least  in  the  western  part 
of  its  range.  On  one  occasion,  in  Kansas,  a  specimen  I  observed 
at  the  base  of  a  rough-barked  tree  ascended  the  bole  about  twenty 
feet.  Doctor  Ortenberger  has  written  me  that  during  March  in 
central  Oklahoma  he  found  an  adult  male  in  a  tree,  in  an  old  bird's 
nest. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  large  species  Eumeces  laticeps  apparently 
is  typically  an  arboreal  form,  being  almost  invariably  found  in  trees. 
I  believe  the  absence  of  any  considerable  number  of  young  in  col- 
lections is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  small  size  of  the  young  in  the 
trees  renders  them  more  or  less  inconspicuous  and  likewise  inacces- 
sible. That  both  young  and  adults  may  descend  to  earth  is  attested 
by  occasional  specimens  captured  on  the  ground.  The  claws  of 
this  form  appear  to  be  more  curved,  a  modification  suggestive  of 
climbing  propensities. 

In  eastern  Kansas  one  finds,  besides  Eumeces  fasciatus,  three 
forms:  Eumeces  obsoletus,  septentrionalis  septentrionalis  and 
ant  hr  acinus. 

The  larger  form,  obsoletus,  occurs  most  frequently  on  open  hill- 
sides where  there  are  some  rock  exposures  or  scattered  flat  rocks. 
Here  the  species  burrows  in  the  ground  and  under  rocks;  often 
runways  are  observable  when  the  rock  is  lifted.  In  the  absence 
of  rocks  the  species  burrows  in  the  open.  Here  they  are  found  with 
greater  difficulty.  They  are  rarely  seen  in  the  open.  Out  of  some 
two  hundred  specimens  captured  possibly  less  than  half  a  dozen 
were  observed  in  the  open. 

In  Texas  a  few  specimens  have  been  dug  from  pack-rat  burrows; 
one  was  shot  from  a  rock  in  the  Chisos  mountains  at  high  elevation 
(near  extreme  summit)  as  it  issued  from  a  rock  crevice,  and  a 
specimen  of  brevilineatus  was  obtained  a  few  feet  away  burrowed 
in  moss. 

Septentrionalis  septentrionalis  in  eastern  Kansas  prefers  open, 
grassy  hillsides  where  small,  flat  rocks  offer  some  shelter.  In 
certain  localities  they  appear  to  be  numerous,  but  their  distribution 
is  unquestionably  erratic.  At  Onaga,  Kan.,  where  more  than  one 
hundred  specimens  have  been  collected,  they  have  with  very  few 


60  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

exceptions  been  captured  under  small,  flat  rocks.  I  have  observed 
but  two  moving  about  in  the  grass. 

Eumeces  anthracinus,  another  species  apparently  of  very  erratic 
distribution,  has  usually  been  found  in  eastern  Kansas  in  the 
neighborhood  of  small  streams  or  springs.  I  have  observed  speci- 
mens to  take  refuge  in  water  when  disturbed.  They  dive  in,  swim 
to  the  shallow  bottom  and  take  refuge  under  a  plant  or  another 
object.  Sometimes  they  swim  under  water  to  an  opposite  bank  and 
slowly  emerge  if  weeds  or  other  cover  offer  protection  from  ob- 
servation. In  southeastern  Kansas,  near  Baxter  Springs,  several 
specimens  were  observed  moving  about  in  the  open,  in  sunlight, 
feeding  on  insects. 

Eumeces  brevilineatus  is  likewise  quite  diurnal,  and  a  large  pro- 
portion of  the  specimens  I  have  taken  were  observed  usually  in  the 
neighborhood  of  small  streams  or  springs  moving  about  during  the 
day  feeding.  In  the  type  locality  (the  Marnock  farm  near  Helotes, 
Tex.)  numerous  specimens  were  seen  running  about  in  brush  and 
leaves  on  the  edge  of  a  tiny  rivulet.  One  specimen,  previously 
mentioned,  was  taken  at  high  elevation,  8,000  feet,  on  the  highest 
peak  of  the  Chisos  mountains,  and  not  near  any  surface  water.  It 
is  apparent  that  elevation  is  not  a  pertinent  factor  in  its  distribution. 

Eumeces  skiltonianus  likewise  appears  to  have  a  wide  vertical 
range.  It  occurs  on  the  seacoast  near  sea  level;  and  it  also  may 
be  found  up  to  elevations  of  8,000  feet  in  the  mountains.  In  com- 
pany with  my  esteemed  friend,  L.  M.  Klauber,  I  captured  a  num- 
ber of  specimens  in  small  meadows  near  the  summit  of  Palomar 
Mountain  in  the  northern  part  of  San  Diego  county.  The  specimens 
were  surprised  while  running  about  in  the  grass,  or  were  found 
ensconsed  underneath  old  posts  or  boards. 

The  large  western  form,  gilberti  gilberti,  apparently  is  a  mountain 
dweller  exclusively,  while  the  related  gilberti  rubricaudatus  may 
occur  in  the  valleys  between  the  high  Sierras  and  the  Coast  Range. 
Whether  either  of  these  forms  is  in  any  measure  arboreal,  I  have 
not  ascertained. 

In  southern  Texas  tetragrammus,  a  form  closely  related  to 
brevilineatus,  is  very  shy.  I  have  never  seen  adults  of  this  form 
moving  about  on  the  ground.  All  specimens  I  have  collected  were 
encountered  while  excavating  in  pack-rat  burrows.  In  northern 
and  central  Texas  septentrionalis  obtusirostris  was  found  in  moist 
localities  about  gravel  pits  or  along  pond  or  river  banks.  They 
were  not  moving  about,   but  were  routed   from  under  leaves  or 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  61 

collected  refuse  under  trees  or  in  decaying  brush  piles.  Here  they 
were  found  in  company  with  Leiolopisma  unicolor  (Harlan)  which 
was  especially  numerous,  and  with  Potomophis  striatulus,  a  small 
snake  which  occurred  in  some  localities  in  almost  unbelievable 
numbers,  especially  in  the  wet  trash  in  the  gravel  pits  near  Waco, 
Tex.  Two  obtusirostris  were  captured  at  night  on  a  log  near  the 
edge  of  a  small  pond.  Both  took  to  the  water,  but  were  captured 
when  they  emerged. 

The  small  egregius  is  a  lowland  form,  hiding  in  the  coral  rock. 
The  Mexican  copei  was  found  in  lava  rock  near  Mexico  City,  and 
in  the  pine  forests  of  western  Mexico  (state)  under  bark  and  slabs 
where  logging  operations  were  going  on.  Occasional  specimens 
were  taken  from  under  rocks.  Indubitus  seems  to  be  likewise  a 
denizen  of  the  pine  forests,  occupying  habitats  identical  to  those 
of  copei,  being  very  common  where  it  occurs.  However,  I  have  not 
taken  copei  and  indubitus  in  the  same  identical  localities.  They 
attain  an  elevation  up  to  10,000  feet  and  probably  do  not  occur 
much  below  6,000  feet. 

A  small  form  of  brevirostris  was  of  very  frequent  occurrence  in  a 
barren  lava  field  near  Totalco,  Vera  Cruz.  The  specimens  were 
discovered  under  lava  fragments.    None  were  seen  in  the  open. 

North  African  and  eastern  Asiatic  species  are  adapted  to  semi- 
desert  habitats  and  all  are  terrestrial  or  fossorial,  and  confined 
largely  to  land  having  a  relatively  low  elevation.  Quadrilineatus, 
managuae  and  schwartzei,  are  probably  lowland  forest  dwellers, 
but  whether  arboreal  or  terrestrial  is  a  matter  of  conjecture. 
Longirostris  is  an  inhabitant  of  the  low,  coral-bordered  Bermuda 
Islands. 

FEEDING  HABITS 

An  examination  of  the  stomach  contents  of  numerous  preserved 
specimens  and  specimens  observed  in  captivity  show  that  the  food 
preferences  are  usually  not  strongly  defined.  The  food  consists  of 
a  very  extensive  variety  of  insects  and  insect  larvae,  Arachnida 
and  occasionally  small  crustaceans.  In  a  few  specimens  traces  of 
plant  material  have  been  observed,  but  I  regard  this  as  being  most 
probably  of  accidental  introduction  in  the  diet.  Probably  the  most 
surprising  fact  about  the  diet  of  the  forms  examined  is  that  ants 
are  absent.  I  have  found  no  specimens  of  this  ever-present  insect 
among  the  stomach  contents,  nor  small  sand  grains  or  pebbles,  the 
usual  accompaniment  of  the  myrmecophagous  diet. 

Some  of  the  larger  species,  notably  obsoletus  and  laticeps,  are 


62  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

known  to  capture  and  engulf  small  vertebrate  forms.  I  removed 
the  remains  of  a  Cnemidophorus  sexlineatus  from  the  stomach  of  an 
Oklahoma  specimen  of  obsoletus.  From  a  captive  specimen  of 
laticeps  I  have  removed  a  young  adult  fasciatus  which  it  had  con- 
sumed during  shipment  from  Imboden,  Ark.,  to  Lawrence,  Kan. 
Obsoletus,  placed  in  a  cage  with  fasciatus,  will  often  kill  the  latter, 
but  I  have  not  observed  any  part  devoured  save  a  freshly  severed 
portion  of  a  tail.  Hartman  (1906)  reports  a  Crotaphytus  killed 
and  eaten.  Out  of  a  large  group  of  some  eighty  specimens  of 
obsoletus  kept  in  captivity,  a  considerable  number  learned  to  eat 
small  fragments  of  ground  beef  placed  about  the  floor  of  the  cage. 
Meal  worms,  Orthoptera,  Diptera  and  other  insects  were  taken 
with  avidity.  The  animal  is  very  crafty  in  its  movements.  When 
a  moving  worm  or  insect  is  sighted  the  animal  crouches  somewhat 
and  then  moves  forward  craftily  and  noiselessly.  When  the  victim 
is  approached  closely  enough  there  is  a  sudden  jerk  of  the  head,  the 
insect  is  seized  and  after  a  few  chewing  movements  it  is  swallowed; 
usually  but  little  attention  is  paid  to  dead  or  motionless  insects. 
After  being  kept  a  short  time  in  captivity  they  are  quite  undisturbed 
by  one's  presence,  and  feed  with  equanimity. 

DEFENSE  HABITS 

Like  many  other  animals,  members  of  the  genus  Eumeces,  when 
annoyed,  react  with  a  defense  attitude  that  appears  to  be  a  generic 
attribute.  In  wild  specimens  of  Eumeces  fasciatus,  a  male  when 
moving  about  may  encounter  another  male.  When  this  occurs, 
usually  both  assume  a  defense  attitude  which  is  evidenced  by  arch- 
ing the  back,  rising,  and  lifting  the  weight  to  the  front  part  of  the 
feet  as  if  to  attain  height,  after  a  greater  than  normal  inflation  of 
the  lungs;  this  may  be  repeated  two  or  more  times.  Occasionally 
one,  more  aggressive  than  the  other,  approaches,  and  the  other  takes 
flight. 

In  captive  specimens,  I  have  observed  the  same  activity  in  speci- 
mens of  obsoletus,  skiltonianus  and  laticeps. 

Usually  captive  specimens  become  tolerant  of  the  presence  of 
others  of  their  own  or  other  species  after  a  time.  They  even  lose 
some  of  their  fear  of  the  presence  of  man.  In  tame  specimens  the 
defense  attitude  may  be  evoked  if  one  places  a  hand  near  them. 
They  rise  on  their  feet  to  as  great  an  extent  as  possible,  arch  their 
backs,  move  their  tails  slowly,  inflate  their  lungs  greatly  and  expel 
the  air  so  forcibly  that  an  audible  hiss  is  evident.     This  latter 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  33 

activity  may  be  repeated  several  times  while  the  animal  remains  in 
the  same  tracks;  or,  moving  mechanically,  it  may  change  its  posi- 
tion by  slow  steps,  keeping  the  head  directed  toward  the  hand  or 
other  invading  object  until  some  distance  from  it  has  been  attained. 
It  will  then  run  to  another  part  of  the  cage.  Frequently,  touching 
or  scratching  the  sides  of  the  body  will  cause  the  lizard  to  assume 
the  arched  attitude  without  the  hissing  reaction.  Sometimes  a  large 
beetle  placed  near  a  tame  specimen  will  cause  it  to  react  and  assume 
a  ''fighting"  or  defense  attitude,  accompanied  by  hissing. 

Two  males  in  the  same  cage  with  a  female  often  engage  in  fights. 
Usually  one  is  more  aggressive  than  the  other.  One  will  seize  the 
other  by  the  throat  or  neck,  perchance  by  a  limb,  and  will  hold 
tenaciously  as  the  other  tries  to  escape.  If  the  one  attempting  to 
escape  is  held  by  the  tail,  as  is  often  the  case,  that  member  is 
frequently  severed  due  to  the  frantic  efforts  of  the  captive  to  escape. 

When  large  snakes  are  placed  in  cages  the  skinks  appear  to 
avoid  the  intruders.  Occasionally  a  small  snake,  such  as  Carphophis 
or  Diadophis,  is  seized  and  held,  the  bite  resulting  in  the  death  of 
the  snake. 

BREEDING  HABITS  AND  LIFE  HISTORY 

Obsoletus  breeds  quite  readily  in  captivity.  I  have  observed  the 
courtship  of  the  form  on  several  occasions.  When  my  presence  was 
noted  by  the  skinks  the  courtship  usually  ceased.  The  male  maneu- 
vers so  as  to  bring  his  body  alongside  that  of  the  female,  and  then 
rubs  his  body  against  the  sides  of  the  quiescent  female.  The 
latter  frequently  responds  by  a  pressure  of  her  body  against  that 
of  the  male.  Occasionally  a  male  follows  a  female  about  the  cage, 
the  female  moving  slowly  ahead,  the  movements  somewhat  tensed 
and  mechanical.  Several  times  males  were  observed  holding  onto 
the  tails  of  the  females  or  dragging  them  by  the  tail  about  the 
floor  of  the  cage.  If  the  female  became  impatient  and  escaped  she 
was  followed  and  again  seized  by  the  male. 

Hobart  Smith  {in  litt.)  describes  the  position  of  copulation  as 
follows:  "The  male  was  on  the  left  side  of  the  female,  which  was 
in  the  normal  position  on  the  bottom  of  the  cage.  The  male  had 
the  head  and  forepart  of  the  body  partly  across  the  body  of  the 
female,  holding  on  to  a  portion  of  loose  skin  on  the  side  of  the  fe- 
male's neck  with  his  jaws.  The  male's  tail  was  crooked  about  under 
the  tail  of  the  female  at  right  angles  to  the  latter,  the  ventral 
surface  of  the  tail  turned  somewhat  forward,  but  not  turned  a  com- 


64  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

plete  revolution.  One  hemipenis  was  inserted.  Vibratory  move- 
ments were  quite  noticeable  in  the  male.  They  were  in  this  position 
when  discovered,  and  were  observed  for  three  minutes  and  twenty 
seconds  after  which  time  they  separated." 

Sexual  activity  has  not  been  observed  by  me  in  other  species 
kept  in  captivity;  however,  fasciatus  and  septentrionalis  do  so  breed, 
since  fertile  eggs  have  been  laid  by  captive  females  of  these  forms 
in  my  vivarium.  The  time  ensuing  after  copulation  before  dep- 
osition of  the  eggs  has  not  been  recorded  in  the  oviparous  forms. 

Ovoviviparity  has  developed  only  in  certain  Mexican  forms  of 
the  Lynxe  and  Brevirostris  groups.  It  is  known  in  Eumeces  lynxe, 
brevirostris  and  dugesii.  The  first  record  which  I  can  find  is  that 
of  Duges,*  who,  writing  of  Eumeces  dugesii  Thominot,  states,  "Si  se 
puecle  juzgar  por  una  observation  unica,  los  creo  viviparos:  los 
chiquitos  nacen  con  un  resto  de  vitellus  colgando  de  su  cordon  um- 
bilical y  el  amnios  arrollado  a  modo  de  cintura  en  la  region  sacra." 

Hartweg  (Copeia,  1931,  p.  61)  records  ovoviviparity  in  Eumeces 
lynxe.  His  material  consisted  of  a  single  female,  containing  six 
young,  measuring  from  44  mm.  to  46  mm.  in  length.  Hartweg 
describes  the  position  of  the  young  in  the  uterus  and  body  cavity, 
not  being  aware  that  this  distribution  was  due  to  the  fact  that  in 
my  examination  of  the  specimen  I  had  removed  certain  of  the  em- 
bryos for  study  of  size  and  coloration,  and  that  they  had  not  been 
returned  to  their  original  position  in  the  uterus.  It  would  appear 
that  the  young  were  nearly  ready  to  be  born,  as  practically  no 
yolk  matter  remained  attached  to  them.  Originally,  all  were  in  the 
uteri  and  none  free  in  the  body  cavity. 

One  specimen  in  the  United  States  National  Museum  (No.  30213, 
Eumeces  brevirostris)  contains  a  series  of  four  developing  embryos. 
The  specimen  is  in  a  poor  state  of  preservation,  and  the  yolk 
material  has  disintegrated  so  that  none  of  the  embryos  is  attached 
to  the  yolk  membranes.  The  embryos  are  about  30  mm.  in  length. 
The  uterine  walls  are  rotted  so  the  young  appear  to  be  loose  in  the 
coelom.    They  show,  as  yet,  no  color  save  the  eye  pigment. 

Still  another  specimen  of  the  same  species  (U.S.N.M.  No.  30089) 
shows  the  presence  of  four  embryos,  but  here,  as  in  No.  30213, 
the  yolk  material  and  the  uterus  have  disintegrated  and  four 
small  embryos,  about  26  mm.  in  length,  appear  to  be  free  in  the 
body  cavity  in  a  semiliquid  yolk. 

These  data  seem  to  prove  conclusively  that  Eumeces  dugesii, 


*La  Naturaleza  (1),  VI,  1882-1884,  p.   362. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  65 

lyn-xe  and  brevirostris  are  normally  ovoviviparous.  None  of  the 
species  in  the  United  States,  Asia  or  Africa  have  as  yet  been  found 
to  be  ovoviviparous. 

This  condition  in  America  is  paralleled  in  the  genus  Sceloporus. 
Few  of  the  species  occurring  in  the  United  States  appear  to  bring 
their  young  forth  alive,  while  many  Mexican  species  are  known 
to  do  so. 

The  condition  of  both  oviparity  and  ovoviviparity  is  likewise 
typical  of  certain  other  genera  of  the  Scincidae,  notably  Mabuya 
and  Leiolopisma,  species  of  which,  in  the  same  locality,  may  exhibit 
both  conditions.  Leiolopisma  pulchellum  pulchellum  is  oviparous, 
Leiolopisma  scmperi,  ovoviviparous;  Mabuya  multicarinata,  ovip- 
arous, Mabuya  multifasciatus,  ovoviviparous,  in  the  Philippines. 
The  latter  two  species  occur  in  the  same  localities. 

The  oviparous  species  usually  deposit  their  eggs  in  moist  earth 
beneath  logs  or  rocks  of  sufficient  thickness  to  protect  the  eggs  from 
too  great  heat  from  the  sun.  The  eggs  are  usually  not  completely 
covered  with  earth.  It  was  found  in  the  case  of  eggs  laid  by 
Eumeces  septentrionalis  septentrionalis  in  captivity  that  if  the  eggs 
were  completely  covered  by  moist  earth  they  invariably  rotted.  If 
only  partially  covered,  they  developed  quite  normally. 

The  eggs  of  Eumeces  fasciatus,  laticeps  and  obsoletus  are  at  least 
in  some  measure  incubated  by  the  skink.  The  body  is  placed  about 
tne  clutch  and  this  position  is  maintained  at  least  for  the  greater 
part  of  the  time  the  eggs  are  incubating.  This  characteristic  has 
been  observed  in  obsoletus  in  the  case  of  a  female  in  Oklahoma 
which  was  brooding  a  clutch  of  ten  eggs.  This  is  the  only  clutch  of 
this  species  I  have  found. 

Captive  specimens  deposited  the  eggs  in  loose  earth  beneath  rocks. 
The  eggs  which  were  removed  as  soon  as  found  to  other  incubating 
grounds  were  apparently  never  brooded,  at  least  not  immediately 
after  they  wTere  laid. 

Noble  and  Mason  (1932)  give  an  excellent  account  of  the  brood- 
ing habits  of  fasciatus  and  laticeps. 


5—1123 


66  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

GROWTH 

The  growth  pattern  of  the  various  species  and  subspecies  of  the 
genus  Enmeces  appears,  so  far  as  investigation  has  gone,  to  be  of  a 
very  stable  nature  and  characteristic  of  the  species.  Throughout 
the  range  of  a  species  the  data  show  a  variation  in  maximum  size 
of  but  a  few  millimeters  and  this  should  diminish  with  a  larger 
number  of  individuals  available  for  measurement. 

I  am  of  the  opinion  that  occasional  cases  of  gigantism  may  ap- 
pear, as  is  true  of  many  other  organisms,  but  I  have  not  observed 
it  in  this  genus.  The  supposed  great  local  differences  in  size  in 
fasciatus  and  skiltonianus  of  many  authors  is  due  to  the  failure  to 
discern  that  two  or  more  distinct  species  were  involved. 

The  taxonomist  should  not  overlook  the  fact  that  a  change  in  a 
gene  producing  a  form  whose  maximum  bulk  is  three  or  four  times 
that  of  the  parent  stock  is  quite  as  "specific"  as  one  that  produces 
a  postnasal  or  splits  a  postmental.  I  consider  maximum  size  and 
the  growth  pattern  a  pertinent  part  of  the  definition  of  a  species. 
However,  the  necessary  description  can  only  be  written  when  a  very 
considerable  amount  of  material  has  been  subjected  to  careful 
scrutiny,  and  careful  data  recorded.  Data  on  the  snout  to  vent 
measurement  were  recorded  for  most  of  the  individuals  of  all  the 
species  I  have  had  available.  Data  so  taken,  when  plotted,  show 
the  individuals  falling  into  groups  which  I  interpret  as  representing 
age  groups.  This  is  particularly  true  of  those  forms  that  live'  in  a 
territory  where  a  well-marked  winter  season  occurs  which  produces 
hibernation.  The  same  may  be  true  in  regions  where  distinct  wet 
and  dry  seasons  occur.  The  majority  of  specimens  collected  in  the 
United  States  were  obtained  during  the  months  of  April,  May  and 
June.  Those  taken  in  other  months  were  greatly  in  the  minority, 
although  specimens  were  examined  that  had  been  collected  each 
month  in  the  year. 

As  a  check  on  the  sum  total  of  the  data  from  specimens  of  a 
species  taken  at  various  times  of  the  year  and  in  numerous  localities, 
I  plotted  the  measurements  of  a  series  of  individuals  taken  at  the 
same  time  of  the  year  (May)  and  in  the  same  locality.  The 
measurements  thus  taken  fall  into  the  various  groups  as  shown  in 
the  total  data  and  approach  the  average  size  for  the  data  groups. 
When  two  or  three  such  series  check  in  this  manner,  it  lends  much 
weight  to  the  postulate  that  these  groups  are  age  groups.  When 
data  for  the  two  sexes  are  plotted,  the  numbers  representing  meas- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  67 

urements  for  the  adult  females  are  usually  a  millimeter  or  two  larger 
than  those  for  the  males. 

As  the  total  amount  of  such  data  is  very  great,  it  is  not  feasible  to 
publish  it  here.  However,  the  following  table  shows  a  summary  of 
the  growth  data  for  live  species.  It  is  obvious  that  the  figures  may 
be  made  more  accurate  with  large  series  from  single  localities,  but 
I  believe  the  averages  are  not  far  from  the  expected  size  for  any 
given  year  of  life. 

Growth  table  for  species  of  En  nieces 

Year 1st*  ?.d  3d  !,th  5th  6th  7th  8th  9th 

fasciatus     27.5  33.6  40.9  48.1  52.2  56.9  60.3  62.7  65.7 

laticeps     35  44.2  53.5  60  66  76  85  90  96 

incxpectatus    28  33  42.2  48.2  54  57.5  60.1  63.2  66 

skiltcmianus    26  32.4  39  45.3  50  54.5  58.2  61.7  63.8 

g.   gilberti    32  40  46  51  60.5  68  74.6  80  85.8 

Ytar 10th  11th       12th  13th        l',th       15th        16th       nth        18th 

fasciatus     68.3  70  72.3  74.9        77            80            

laticeps     100.3  105.5  110  114          117.5        124 

incxpectatus     69  71.4        74.3  77             ....        83            

skiltoniamus    66.4  69  70.3  72            75            

g.    gilberti    90  95.2  100              106              113 

*  In  September ;   other  years  June. 

SPECIATION  AND  MODE  OF  EVOLUTION 

The  species  which  I  believe  represent  the  more  ancient  members 
of  the  genus  belong  to  the  Schneiderii,  Schwartzei,  Taeniolatus, 
Longirostris,  Obsoletus,  Egregius  and  Quadrilineatus  groups.  These 
are  so  regarded  largely  because  each  is  now  isolated  from  its  most 
closely  related  group.  The  Taeniolatus,  Longirostris  and  Quad- 
rilineatus groups  are  monotypic,  the  last  two  widely  separated  from 
their  nearest  living  relatives.  There  may  be  some  doubt  whether 
Taeniolatus  is  more  closely  related  to  the  Schneiderii  group  or  to 
the  Schwartzei  group.  I  am  inclined  to  regard  the  former  as  the 
nearer  relative. 

The  Schwartzei  group  has  three  forms,  all  apparently  very 
strongly  differentiated,  while  the  Schneiderii  group  has  six  forms, 
all  lacking  strong  differential  characters.  By  reason  of  this  the 
latter  is  presumably  the  more  recently  developed  stock  of  the  above- 
listed  groups.  I  regard  it  quite  probable  that  the  genus  originated 
in  Asia,  later  spreading  to  America  and  Africa.  The  stock  of  the 
four-  and  five-lined  groups  appears  to  be  for  the  most  part  of  much 
more  recent  development,  so  regarded  largely  because  they  are 
contiguous  at  some  point  with  a  related  group;  they  appear  plastic 
and  as  yet  show  less  specialization  from  the  generalized  ancestral 
type.    I  regard  the  modern  five-lined  skinks  of  the  genus  in  eastern 


68  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Asia  as  having  been  derived  from  American  forms,  since  the  mem- 
bers all  belong  to  one  group,  and  all  are  quite  closely  related  to  each 
other,  as  well  as  to  the  American  forms  of  their  group,  and  all  with 
a  minimum  of  specialization. 

The  American  forms  have  differentiated  to  a  much  greater  extent, 
suggesting  a  longer  sojourn  in  their  present  similar  environment. 
It  is  possible,  but  not  certain,  that  the  four-lined  group  originated 
in  southeastern  Asia,  and  has  spread  to  North  America. 

The  island  derivatives  of  Eumeces  elegans  show  less  modifications 
from  the  parent  species  than  one  usually  regards  as  specific.  How- 
ever, I  prefer  to  use  specific  rather  than  subspecific  names  for  forms 
on  isolated  island  groups  which  are  definable  and  which  cannot 
intermingle  with  other  similar  populations. 

Inasmuch  as  the  criterion  of  what  constitutes  a  namable  form  is 
constantly  changing,  it  seems  probable  that  when  the  reptiles  have 
been  studied  with  the  same  amount  of  material  as  mammals,  we 
will  doubtless  see  far  more  named  varieties  than  I  have  regarded  it 
wise  to  recognize  at  this  time.  It  seems  quite  likely  that  at  least 
certain  forms  of  E.  skiltonianus ,  laticeps,  brevirostris  and  multi- 
virgatus  will  be  separated  on  the  basis  of  variants  already  known. 

There  are  no  strong  trends  in  this  group  toward  specialization  of 
the  limbs,  as  is  evidenced  in  several  genera  of  the  skinks,  such  as 
Brachymeles  and  Chalcides,  and  which  appear  to  be  due  to  ortho- 
genic evolution;  nor  trends  such  as  one  finds  in  Mabuya  and 
Tropidophorus  toward  modification  of  the  scales  with  strong  keels 
and  spines.  Single  scales  may  become  modified  along  orthogenic 
lines  (lateral  postanal),  and  occasionally  groups  of  scales  (fusion 
of  the  dorsal  rows) .  Striation  of  dorsal  scales  has  appeared  in  two 
remote  groups.  Variation  that  obtains  appears  to  be  more  sporadic; 
and  similar  variations  from  the  generalized  type  are  brought  about 
by  fusion  (or  dropping  out)  of  elements  or  by  the  breaking  up  of 
elements.  There  is  a  tendency  for  both  dwarf  and  giant  forms  to 
appear.  Habitation  of  small  islands  has  not  had  very  great  effect 
on  size,  or  at  least  no  very  consistent  effect.  Longirostris,  on  the 
Bermuda  Islands,  is  a  relatively  large  form.  Kishinouyei,  a  small- 
island  species,  is  very  large  and  equally  as  large  as  its  related 
continental  species.  Barboari,  however,  likewise  an  island  form,  is 
the  smallest  member  of  its  group.  On  the  other  hand,  egregius, 
dicei,  parvulus  and  parviauriculatus,  all  continental  species,  have  be- 
come dwarfed  in  a  variety  of  habitats.  There  seems  to  be  no  en- 
vironmental factor  in  common  stimulating  the  development  of 
large  size  in  laticeps  and  gilberti. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  69 

The  number  of  scale  rows  hears  no  consistent  relation  to  size. 
True,  most  of  the  smaller  species  have  fewer  rows  than  their 
related  larger  species.  However,  the  number  of  scales  is  as  much 
reduced  in  certain  members  of  the  Schwartzei  and  Schneiderii 
groups,  certain  members  of  which  attain  a  size  greater  than  any 
other  members  of  the  genus. 

SEXUAL  DIMORPHISM 

No  striking  general  sexual  dimorphism  is  evident  in  squamation 
in  Eumeces.  However,  in  many  species  the  sex  may  be  determined 
on  the  basis  of  special  scales  and  color  characters.  In  adult  males 
the  proximal  ventral  portion  of  the  tail  is  somewhat  fuller  and 
more  rounded  due  to  the  presence  of  the  hemipenes.  In  a  number  of 
species,  notably  certain  Asiatic  members  of  the  Fasciatus  group,  a 
lateral  postanal  scale  is  strongly  modified.  This  is  true  to  a  lesser 
extent  in  members  of  the  Obsoletus  and  Skiltonianus  groups.  In 
these  Asiatic  forms  of  the  Fasciatus  group  the  scale  bears  a  strong, 
well-defined  keel  which  is  wanting  or  dimly  evident  in  the  females. 
In  the  Obsoletus  group  the  scale  is  somewhat  enlarged  and  mound- 
like, often  bearing  less  pigment  than  the  adjoining  scales.  The  scale 
in  several  other  groups  is  more  or  less  modified  in  the  males,  but 
the  difference  is  usually  much  less  evident. 

As  a  general  rule,  in  forms  in  which  there  is  color  dimorphism, 
the  female  tends  to  retain  the  juvenile  coloration,  or,  if  this  is  lost, 
it  is  lost  at  a  time  later  than  in  the  male.  In  most,  if  not  all,  of 
the  members  of  the  Sumichrasti,  Fasciatus,  Longirostris  and  certain 
of  the  Skiltonianus  and  Obsoletus  groups,  the  juvenile  lined  pattern 
becomes  dim  and  in  older  males  finally  lost  completely,  while  more 
or  less  of  the  lined  pattern  is  retained  by  the  oldest  females.  An 
exception  to  the  latter  rule  obtains  in  Eumeces  gilberti  gilberti  and 
gilberti  rubricaudatus.  In  these  forms  the  females  take  on  quite 
faithfully  the  same  color  and  markings  as  the  males  (except  the 
reddened  head) ,  but  do  so  two  or  three  years  (sometimes  more)  later 
than  males  of  equal  age. 

Old  males  of  the  four  groups  mentioned  above  usually  have  the 
temporal  region  more  or  less  inflated,  often  quite  abnormally  dis- 
torted, apparently  reaching  the  greatest  development  in  Eumeces 
laticeps.    . 

During  the  breeding  season  males  of  many  species  display  a 
reddish  coloration  on  the  head  and  sides  of  the  neck  and  chin.  This 
varies  greatly  in  shade  and  intensity  in  various  species,  likewise  in 


70  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

individuals  of  the  same  species.  Sometimes  this  red  coloration  is 
more  or  less  permanent  on  the  heads  of  the  males.  I  have  not  ob- 
served it  on  the  heads  of  the  females. 

The  body  length  of  adult  females  (axilla  to  groin)  is  propor- 
tionally longer  than  in  males,  at  least  in  proportion  to  the  length 
of  the  limbs.  Thus,  the  adpressed  limbs  of  females  overlap  less  or 
are  separated  by  a  greater  distance  than  in  the  males. 

In  females  distended  with  eggs  or  young,  the  scales,  due  to  the 
stretching  of  the  skin,  appear  to  be  somewhat  larger  than  in  the 
males. 

CONSIDERATION  AND  EVALUATION  OF  SPECIFIC 
CHARACTERS  USED  IN  DESCRIPTIONS 

Data  listed  in  the  descriptions  may  be  in  a  measure  misleading 
unless  the  significance  and  variability  that  may  be  anticipated  is 
considered;  hence  the  following  discussion  of  characters. 

Rostral.  The  rostral  reaches  to  the  top  of  the  snout  a  greater 
or  lesser  distance,  and  the  area  of  the  part  seen  from  a  dorsal  view 
is  usually  a  constant  character.  In  the  drawings,  due  to  fore- 
shortening, the  part  visible  may  appear  less  than  the  description 
states.  When  there  appears  to  be  a  variation  in  the  relative  size  of 
the  visible  part  of  the  rostral  and  the  frontonasal,  it  is  due  to 
variation  in  the  size  of  the  latter  scale. 

Nasal.  The  nasal  scale  is  in  most  species  of  Eumeces  divided  by 
sutural  grooves  which  emerge  from  the  anterior  edge  of  the  nostril 
and  continue  to  the  upper  edge  of  the  scale,  and  from  the  lower 
anterior  edge  of  the  nostril,  continuing  to  the  rostral  or  first  labial. 
The  nasal  scale  may  be  shed  singly  or  may  break  at  the  suture;  if 
together  it  usually  may  be  separated  by  a  touch.  Sometimes  the 
scale  lacks  the  suture,  no  or  only  a  slight  depression  marking  the 
position  of  the  suture,  and  the  scale  does  not  break  at  this  point. 
The  latter  is  the  expected  condition  in  E.  septentrionalis  septen- 
trionalis. 

Normally  the  posterior  part  of  the  nasal  carries  the  part  of  the 
scale  flooring  the  nostril;  the  anterior  part,  only  the  anterior  turned 
down  rim.  When  a  postnasal  is  not  present,  there  is  usually  a  small 
area  of  the  scale  behind  the  nostril ;  when  present,  the  posterior  part 
is  narrow,  forming  merely  a  rim  about  the  posterior  part  of  the 
nostril.  I  presume  that  the  normal  postnasal  is  formed  chiefly 
from  the  nasal,  although  its  position  may  occasionally  suggest  a 
derivation  from  the  first  loreal.     Occasionally  the  anterior  loreal 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


71 


preocular    - 
Superaliaries — 
posterior  loreal-.      "•■ 
onfenor   loreal 
postnasals 
nasal  -^^ 
rostral^ 


mental 


,-  upper    secondary 
temporal 

>  tertiaru  temporals 
■f  '/oiver   secondary 
temporal 
prirnaru  temporal 

p post labials 

upper  labials 
"  lower~  labia's 


rostra/ 

-  supr~anasals 

-  -frontonasal 


prefrontal 
-  ■frontal 


y~    supraoculars 


■frontoparietal 

parietal 

■*"--  interparietal 

upper'     s^c  on  dor-y 

■temporal 


-     nuchal 


upper    palpebral    series 
1       Super  ci  liar  i  es       /' 


C- -  postoculars 


x'  postsuboculars 


,'  lower    palpebral     series 
pre  sub  oculars 


D 


Fig.  4.   Head  plates  of  Eumeces.    A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal 
view  of  head;  C,  ventral  surface  of  head;  D,  region  of  eye. 


72  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

may  be  segmented  transversely  in  forms  where  no  postnasal  occurs, 
and  gives  the  impression  that  a  postnasal  is  present.  That  this  is 
not  the  case  is  evident  by  noting  that  in  such  cases  the  upper  part 
of  the  loreal  is  separated  from  the  labials — a  condition  that  does 
not  normally  occur  in  any  species,  but  does  occur  frequently  in 
E.  latisciitatus. 

Postnasal.  This  scale  is  relatively  constant  when  present,  and  in 
species  where  it  is  normally  absent,  rarely  appears.  However,  in 
multivirgatus,  a  species  in  which  the  scale  may  be  regarded  as 
normally  present,  it  is  absent  on  one  or  both  sides  in  about  10  per- 
cent of  the  specimens.  One  may,  however,  expect  occasional  excep- 
tions to  the  general  rule  in  practically  all  species.  The  variation 
is  likewise  great  in  E.  obsoletus,  being  absent  in  the  south,  but 
present  in  numerous  northern  specimens. 

Stjpranasals.  Constancy  of  size  and  relation  to  adjoining  scales 
is  the  normal  expectation  as  regards  the  supranasals.  They  are 
usually  in  contact,  separating  the  rostral  from  the  frontonasal ;  how- 
ever, the  supranasals  may  separate,  and  in  the  case  of  E.  septen- 
trionalis  septentrionalis  this  condition  occurs  in  more  than  20  per- 
cent of  the  material  examined.  In  forms  having  a  variable  fronto- 
nasal the  size  of  the  prefrontals  rather  than  the  supranasals  is 
usually  affected.  This  separation  of  the  supranasals  occurs  only 
rarely  in  other  species  and  normally  occurs  in  none. 

Prefrontals.  These  scales,  differing  in  size  and  shape  in  various 
species,  are  likewise  quite  variable  within  most  species,  and  in  some 
species  it  is  difficult  to  say  whether  the  normal  condition  is  to  have 
the  scales  forming  a  median  suture  (separating  frontal  and  fronto- 
nasal) or  to  have  them  separated,  leaving  the  frontal  and  fronto- 
nasal in  contact.  In  Eumeces  laticeps,  one  may  definitely  say  that 
the  prefrontals  are  normally  in  contact,  being  separate  in  less  than 
one  percent  of  the  specimens.  E.  jasciatus,  on  the  other  hand,  has 
these  scales  extremely  variable,  reaching  78  percent  separate  in 
certain  localities,  and  as  low  as  5  percent  in  other  localities.  When 
in  contact  the  scales  are  usually  distinctly  larger  than  when  sepa- 
rated, and  the  shape  of  the  posterior  part  of  the  frontonasal  and  of 
the  anterior  angle  of  the  frontal  is  likewise  modified. 

Frontal.  The  general  shape  and  the  relative  width  and  length 
of  the  frontal  are  only  moderately  constant,  since  the  separation  of 
the  prefrontals  usually  causes  a  greater  length.  A  rare  anomaly  is 
the  transverse  segmentation  of  the  scale.    This  I  have  found  occur- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  73 

ring  in  at  least  ten  species.  The  type  of  E.  lynxe  lurcirostris  shows 
this  division,  hut  it  is  douhtlcss  merely  an  anomalous  condition. 
Many  species  may  occasionally  show  small  portions  segmented  from 
the  posterior  part  of  the  scale.  Anomalies  have  been  observed  in 
several  species  which  permit  the  frontal  to  touch  the  interparietal; 
in  E.  tat  niolatus  this  is  presumably  the  normal  condition. 

Interparietal.  In  very  young  specimens  this  scale  is  almost 
invariably  proportionally  larger  and  more  prominent  than  in  the 
adults.  Apparently  the  actual  shape  of  the  scale  may  change  as 
the  specimen  grows  older.  In  most  species  the  scale  is  separated 
from  the  frontal  (see  above  paragraph)  and  is  in  contact  posteriorly 
with  the  nuchals.  In  a  few  species  the  normal  condition  is  for  the 
interparietal  to  be  separated  from  the  nuchals  by  a  union  of  the 
parietals.  This  is  true  of  several  Mexican  species,  and  the  transi- 
tional condition  is  evident  in  E.  skiltonianus  in  the  extreme  southern 
part  of  California,  where  a  considerable  precentage  of  the  specimens 
shows  this  condition,  which  apparently  becomes  the  normal  relation- 
ship in  Baja  California. 

Supraoculars.  The  number  of  supraoculars  is  uniformly  four 
throughout  the  greater  part  of  the  genus  and  anomalies  producing 
more  or  less  are  rare.  In  E.  dugesii,  E.  lynxe  furcirostris  and  E. 
egregius,  however,  three  is  the  normal  number.  In  most  descriptions 
of  E.  taeniolatus,  algeriensis  and  schneiderii,  the  number  is  usually 
given  as  five;  this  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  small  vertical  scale 
terminating  the  superciliary  series  has  become  greatly  enlarged 
and  has  been  rated  as  a  supraocular,  while  the  same  scale,  invariably 
present  in  other  known  species,  is  considered  the  terminal  super- 
ciliary. To  be  consistent  the  scale  must  be  interpreted  the  same 
throughout  the  genus — all  having  five  (four  in  egregius,  etc.)  or 
none  having  five.    I  choose  the  latter  interpretation. 

Superciliaries.  The  number  of  superciliaries  is  quite  variable, 
but  in  general  character  they  are  constant  for  a  given  species.  The 
posterior  ones  of  the  series  tend  to  segment  or  fuse  (as  the  case  may 
be).  The  expectation  is  for  the  anterior  one  to  be  in  contact  with 
the  prefrontal  and  only  rarely  does  it  fail  to  be  so.  Normally,  too, 
it  is  separated  from  contact  with  the  frontal,  but  occasionally  they 
may  touch.  The  last  two  of  the  series  are  normally  in  contact,  but 
occasionally  the  last  (vertical)  one  may  be  separated  from  the 
preceding  one  by  the  fourth  supraocular;  or  a  small  postocular 
may  intervene.    This  latter  condition  is  typical  in  E.  egregius. 


74  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

The  median  superciliaries  are  in  contact  in  most  species  with 
the  upper  palpebral  scales  bordering  the  edge  of  the  eyelid,  while 
the  anterior  and  posterior  ones  are  separated  from  the  palpebrals 
by  small  granules.  In  some  forms,  however,  practically  all  the 
palpebrals  are  in  contact  with  the  superciliaries  (E.  schwartzei) , 
while  in  the  Schneiderii  group  all  are  separated  by  one  or  more 
rows  of  granules,  thus  permitting  greater  movement  of  and  giving 
greater  area  to  the  upper  eyelid. 

Prestjboculars.  This  term  is  applied  to  the  small  scales  lying 
between  the  anterior  corner  of  the  eye,  the  labials  and  the  posterior 
loreal.  Two  is  the  usual  number  (rarely,  anomalously,  one  or 
three).  In  E.  schwartzei,  altamirani  and  managuae,  however,  the 
normal  number  appears  to  be  three. 

Postsuboculars.  A  series  of  small  scales  bordering  the  lower 
posterior  edge  of  the  orbit  separating  the  temporals  and  labials 
from  that  part  of  the  orbit  is  so  designated.  The  scales  of  this 
series  are  usually  variable  in  different  species.  In  E.  obsoletus  this 
series  and  the  presubocular  series  may  actually  appear  continuous, 
due  to  a  slight  enlargement  and  the  presence  of  darker  pigment 
in  the  small,  light-colored,  opaque  scales  of  the  lower  eyelid.  An 
anomalous  condition  due  to  segmentation  of  a  portion  or  portions 
of  the  subocular  labial  may  produce  this  same  continuation  be- 
tween the  two  groups  (observed  in  E.  laticeps) .  The  continuity 
of  the  presuboculars  and  postsuboculars  is  normal  in  certain  African 
and  western  Asiatic  species. 

Temporals.  The  group  of  scales  occupying  the  temporal  region 
is  somewhat  difficult  of  interpretation  and  heretofore  the  termi- 
nology has  not  been  adequate  for  accurate  description.  However, 
these  scales  must  be  considered  as  important  and  as  pertinent  to  a 
description  of  a  species  as  any  other  scales  on  the  head.  The  num- 
ber of  these  scales  varies  somewhat  with  the  species.  Four  is  the 
normal  expectation.  The  most  anterior  may  be  considered  as  the 
primary  temporal,  and  is  usually  small,  single  and  normally  present 
save  in  E.  egregius,  E.  dicei  and  possibly  colimensis;  the  next 
(posterior)  are  termed  the  secondary  temporals.  These  are  two 
usually,  the  upper  one  bordering  the  parietal;  the  other  just  below 
it,  is  the  lower  secondary,  which  is  in  contact  with  the  primary 
save  in  a  few  species  where  it  may  be  separated  from  it  leaving  the 
upper  secondary  in  contact  with  the  last  labial.  In  this  case  the 
scale  may  be  pushed  back  or  may  be  interpreted  as  wanting.  The 
tertiary  temporal    (occasionally   divided)    is   usually   a   vertically 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  75 

elongate  scale  bordering  the  upper  secondary  temporal  and  extend- 
ing down  behind  the  lower  secondary.  The  temporals  for  any  given 
species  may  be  regarded  as  constant  as  most  of  the  other  head  scales 
and  in  many  species  may  be  diagnostic.  In  E.  ochoterenae  there  is 
considerable  variation  in  the  relation  of  the  last  labial  and  the 
upper  secondary  temporal;  very  rarely  is  this  variable  in  skiltoni- 
anits. 

Parietals.  These  scales,  due  to  their  great  irregularity  of  shape, 
are  somewhat  difficult  to  describe  to  bring  out  specific  characters, 
yet  differences  are  usually  in  evidence  on  a  comparison  of  two 
species.  Usually  their  relationship,  whether  in  contact  or  sepa- 
rated, is  diagnostic;  an  exception  is  Eumeces  brevirostris  as  here 
interpreted. 

Loreals.  Two  loreals  are  present,  an  anterior  and  a  posterior, 
the  former  of  which  is  usually  vertically  elongate  and  higher  than 
the  latter.  The  length  of  the  posterior  is  usually  greater  than  its 
vertical  height.  However,  in  certain  species  the  anterior  reaches  no 
higher  than  the  posterior,  and  is  a  constant  character. 

Boulenger  et  al.  have  regarded  the  large  scale  following  the  nasal 
in  taeniolatus  {scutatus  Boulenger)  as  being  a  third  loreal.  I  in- 
terpret this  as  a  postnasal. 

The  posterior  loreal  is  occasionally  found  with  a  posterior  segment 
(vertically  segmented  usually),  while  the  anterior  is  found  oc- 
casionally transversely  segmented  (frequently  in  E.  multivirgatus 
and  E.  septentrionalis  septentrionalis) . 

Preocular.  This  is  a  small  scale  lying  between  the  first  supercil- 
iary, the  posterior  loreal,  and  the  presubocular,  against  which  the 
anterior  palpebrals  of  the  upper  and  lower  lids  abut.  It  is  followed, 
above  the  palpebrals,  by  one  or  more  granules  diminishing  in  size,  or 
by  a  continuous  series  across  the  lid,  as  in  African  forms. 

Postoctjlars.  A  pair  of  small  scales  lying  at  the  posterior  corner 
of  the  eye,  inclosing  partially  the  posterior  palpebral  of  both  upper 
and  lower  lids,  is  so  designated.  The  upper  may  enlarge  to  such 
a  size  that  it  breaks  the  continuity  of  the  superciliary  series. 

Scales  of  Lower  Eyelid.  Practically  all  species  show  an  en- 
larged series  of  opaque  or  semitransparent  scales  lacking  pigment 
other  than  white,  which  are  in  contact  with  the  lower  palpebral 
scales.  These  are  usually  vertically  elongate,  rectangular,  and 
diminish  in  size  from  the  center.  Neither  their  number  nor  their  size 
is  constant.    These  are  separated  from  the  pre-  and  postsuboculars 


76  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

and  the  subocular  by  from  one  to  four  rows  of  very  small  scales 
which  are  usually  flat,  and  either  juxtaposed  or  imbricating.  The 
number  of  rows  is  usually  fairly  constant  for  the  species.  In  certain 
forms  of  the  Schneiderii  group  the  enlarged  scales  may  be  in  two 
series,  reduced  greatly  in  size. 

Upper  Labials.  This  series  is  considered  as  terminating  with  a 
large  scale  whose  posterior  edge  lies  some  distance  in  front  of  the 
ear  and  is  separated  from  the  ear  by  one  scale,  a  pair  of  scales,  or 
in  some  cases,  several  (four  or  five)  pairs.  In  some  published 
descriptions  these  small  scales  are  counted  as  labials,  and,  where 
only  a  single  scale  appears,  it  is  quite  similar  to  those  of  the  labial 
series,  and  may  actually  partially  border  the  corner  of  the  mouth. 
For  the  sake  of  uniformity  the  last  labial  counted  is  the  large  scale, 
invariably  the  second  following  the  subocular  labial;  the  scales 
following  are  regarded  as  postlabial  or  preauricular  scales.  The 
general  characters  of  the  labials  are  diagnostic  in  many  cases. 

The  anterior  part  of  the  series  (three,  four  or  five)  may  be  vari- 
able in  many  species;  for  instance,  five  is  the  usual  number  in  E. 
laticeps  and  only  rarely  are  four  present ;  four  is  the  normal  number 
for  E.  fasciatus,  but  the  number  five  appears  rather  frequently.  In 
E.  egregius,  rarely  also  in  E.  anthracinus,  the  number  may  be  re- 
duced to  three.  The  relative  height  and  the  length  of  the  labials, 
perhaps  more  especially  of  the  subocular,  are  relatively  constant  for 
a  species. 

Lower  Labials.  This  series  of  scales  is  likewise  variable  in 
number,  and  the  count  is  made  from  the  mental  to  the  largest 
elongate  scale  which  appears  to  terminate  the  series,  but  which  may 
be  followed  by  one  or  more  smaller  scales,  concealed  below  the  large 
(last)  upper  labial. 

Mental.  The  scale  for  a  given  species  usually  is  constant  as  to 
the  extent  of  its  labial  border  and  its  depth. 

Postmental.  The  mental  is  followed  by  either  a  large,  single, 
undivided  scale,  or  by  two  scales  formed  by  a  transverse  division 
of  the  large  single  scale.  In  most  species  one  or  the  other  of  these 
conditions  is  constant  save  for  an  occasional  exception.  However,  in 
E.  fasciatus,  where  the  normal  expectation  throughout  the  greater 
part  of  the  range  is  two  postmentals,  occasional  individuals  may  be 
found  with  a  single,  undivided  postmental,  and  in  the  extreme 
southwestern  part  of  the  range  (Oklahoma),  this  condition  may  be 
present  in  40  percent  of  the  individuals. 


Taylor:    The  Genls  Eumeces  77 

Chinshields.  Tlicrc  is  a  very  remarkable  constancy  in  the  gen- 
eral relation  of  the  chinshields  following  the  postmentals;  these 
consist  of  three  pairs  of  scales,  the  first  strongly  in  contact  medially 
(rarely  not);  the  second  pair  separated  by  a  single  small  scale; 
and  the  third  pair  separated  usually  by  three  scales.  In  E.  egregius 
there  are  only  two  pairs  of  chinshields  normally  present. 

Postgenial.  I  use  this  name  to  describe  the  elongate  scale 
bordering  the  lower  labials  posterior  to  the  last  (third)  chinshield. 
This  scale  is  usually  constant,  and  in  the  greater  number  of  the 
species  is  bordered  on  its  inner  edge  by  an  elongate  scale  shaped 
somewhat  similar  to  the  postgenial,  though  smaller,  and  which 
likewise  borders  the  posterior  edge  of  the  third  chinshield.  This 
scale,  in  certain  Mexican  species,  is  very  different,  and  appears  as 
a  broad  scale,  distinctly  of  greater  diameter  transversely  than 
longitudinally,  and  is  constant  for  the  species.  This  condition  ob- 
tains also  in  certain  African  forms.  However,  the  elongate  scale 
rarely  may  fuse  with  the  postgenial,  resulting  in  a  wider  postgenial, 
which  is  then  bordered  by  the  adjoining  scale  which  is  wider  than 
long.  This  fusion  has  probably  brought  about  the  condition  in  the 
Mexican  species.  In  Eumeces  skiltonianus  the  fusion  takes  place 
occasionally. 

Scale  Rows.  The  variation  in  the  number  of  scale  rows  is  con- 
siderable, and  it  varies  at  various  parts  of  the  body.  Thus,  in  the 
region  behind  the  ear,  there  is  a  postauricular  series  of  four  or  five 
vertical  rows  which  are  sharply  set  off  from  a  series  of  lateral 
neck  scales  by  their  smaller  size,  and  by  a  definite  line  denoting  a 
different  direction  of  the  scale  rows.  This  series  of  neck  scales  is 
then  set  off  posteriorly  from  the  suprabrachial  lateral  shoulder 
scales  by  another  line  usually  running  up  from  the  anterior  point 
of  insertion  of  the  forelimb  onto  the  shoulder  (usually  diagonally). 

Posterior  to  the  insertion  of  the  arm  in  the  axilla  is  an  area,  small 
in  some  forms,  larger  in  others,  with  tiny  granular  scales,  which 
may  also  border  the  arm  insertion  dorsally;  behind  this  there  is  a 
radial  series  of  scales,  running  upward  and  backward,  which  usually 
continue  diagonally  a  distance  equal  to  the  length  of  the  forelimb 
and  sometimes  farther.  These  are,  however,  somewhat  irregular  in 
their  point  of  termination  and  occasionally  one  terminating  nor- 
mally anteriorly  will  be  continued  to  the  groin,  thereby  increasing 
the  scale  count  at  the  middle  of  the  body.  Sometimes  the  inter- 
calated rows  may  terminate  near  the  middle  and  a  count  one  or 
two  scales  farther  forward  may  vary  the  count  by  two  rows. 


78  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

The  greater  number  of  species  vary  considerably  so  that  in  some 
species  a  variation  of  as  many  as  eight  scales  may  occur  in  the 
counts;  and  they  may  vary  as  much  as  six  scales  in  a  group  of 
specimens  from  a  single  locality.  However,  this  is  greater  than  is 
usual  and  a  variation  of  two  rows  is  the  more  normal  expectation. 
The  number  of  scale  rows  about  the  base  of  the  tail  is  fairly  constant 
and  is  usually  very  different  in  most  species  from  the  number  about 
the  body.  In  some  forms  the  number  may  be  nearly  the  same 
(counts  should  be  made  from  the  first  widened  subcaudal).  In  the 
region  posterior  to  the  insertion  of  the  hind  limb  there  are  in  most 
American,  Mexican  and  eastern  Asiatic  forms,  no  granular  scales. 
In  the  African  and  western  Asiatic  species  there  is  usually  a  con- 
siderable area  in  this  region  covered  by  tiny,  nonimbricating  scales. 
When  the  limb  is  laid  back  on  the  side  of  the  tail  a  pocket-like  de- 
pression is  formed  along  the  side  of  the  anal  region. 

In  most  species  the  scales  on  the  side  of  the  body  form  parallel 
longitudinal  rows.  In  two  forms,  E.  longirostris  and  E.  obsoletus, 
the  normal  condition  is  to  have  well-defined  diagonal  rows  on  the 
sides  of  the  body.  However,  in  the  latter  species,  in  the  extreme 
southwestern  part  of  the  range,  the  scales  may  be  parallel  on  the 
sides  in  some  of  the  specimens.  In  all  species  the  scales  in  the 
axilla  form  diagonal  rows. 

In  certain  of  the  western  Asiatic,  Mexican  and  Central  American 
species  the  two  median  rows  appear  to  unite,  forming  a  single 
median  row  for  a  part  of  the  distance  on  the  back;  in  the  African 
forms  the  two  median  series  are  much  widened,  but  never  unite  to 
form  a  single  median  series. 

In  many  species,  on  the  dorsal  surface  of  the  neck  following  the 
nuchals,  the  scales  are  wider  than  the  succeeding  scales,  and  in  the 
Taeniolatus  and  Schwartzei  groups,  where  several  pairs  of  nuchals 
are  present,  the  succeeding  widened  scales  between  the  nuchals  and 
the  median  widened  series  have  been  likewise  called  (erroneously) 
nuchals  in  the  descriptions  of  certain  authors. 

In  numerous  species  the  termination  of  a  lateral  row  is  marked 
by  one  or  two  considerably  enlarged  scales;  the  ventral  scales  on 
the  breast,  too,  are  usually  very  considerably  enlarged. 

Preanals.  The  anterior  edge  of  the  anus  is  usually  bordered  by 
six  or  eight  scales.  These  consist  of  a  median,  frequently  somewhat 
thickened  pair,  more  or  less  greatly  enlarged,  with  two  or  three 
scales  on  each    side,    diminishing    in    size.     In    the    Taeniolatus, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  79 

Schwartzei  and  Schnci(hri)  groups,  the  inner  scales  overlap  the 
edges  of  the  outer  pairs.  In  all  other  species  the  outer  scales  over- 
lap the  edges  of  the  inner,  except  in  longirostris,  in  which  the  second 
outer  overlaps  the  median  as  well  as  the  adjoining  scale. 

Lateral  Postanal.  In  the  males  of  most  species  there  is  present 
a  more  or  less  differentiated  scale  lying  at  the  posterior  lateral 
border  of  the  anus.  In  certain  eastern  Asiatic  species  the  scale  bears 
a  flattened  spine  or  keel.  The  scale,  however,  in  most  species  is  larger 
and  may  have  a  slight  convexity  or  increased  thickness.  The  scale 
is  prominent  in  E.  obsoh  tus,  and  to  a  lesser  extent  in  the  species  of 
the  SkiLtonianus  group  occurring  in  California.  It  is  probable  that  a 
glandular  area  is  present  under  the  scale.  In  several  species  the 
-exes  can  be  determined  by  this  character,  since  it  is  undifferentiated 
or  less  differentiated  in  the  female  than  in  the  male. 

Si  bcaudals.  The  width  of  the  subcaudal  scales  in  relation  to 
that  of  the  adjoining  rows  is  a  constant  character  and  very  little 
variation  has  been  noted.  When  the  tail  is  regenerated,  the  char- 
acter of  these  scales  changes  and  in  species  wdiere  the  subcaudal 
-cales  are  not  widened  in  the  original  tail,  they  may  become  greatly 
widened  in  the  regenerated  part  (true  especially  in  Eumeces  inex- 
pectatus).  The  number  of  subcaudals  varies  somewhat,  but  within 
a  relatively  small  range. 

Scale  Pits.  The  scales  on  the  sides  of  the  posterior  part  of 
head,  the  scales  of  the  sides  of  neck,  body  and  base  of  tail  and  the 
scales  on  upper  arm  and  leg  are  usually  pitted  with  two  or  more 
small  pits  near  the  posterior  part  of  the  scale.  These  may  be 
rounded  or  set  in  a  short  distance  from  the  posterior  edge  of  the 
scale  or  may  form  a  groove  to  the  posterior  edge.  Often  there  are 
more  than  the  typical  two  on  scales  of  side  of  neck  and  body  while 
invariably  the  scales  in  the  posthumeral  and  postfemoral  regions 
have  more  than  two. 

The  head  scales  likewise  show  evidence  of  pitting,  but  this  is 
often  not  evident.  Only  a  few  forms  have  the  dorsal  scales  pitted. 
The  pitting  is  less  distinct,  occasionally  quite  obsolete,  in  old  adults. 

Color  Description.  The  names  median,  dorsolateral  and  lateral 
light  lines  are  self-explanatory.  The  sublateral  usually  is  very  low 
on  the  side,  and  when  present  is  never  conspicuous.  Usually  it 
disappears  before  any  other  line. 

Secondary  Lines  of  Color  Pattern.  The  young  are  nearly  al- 
ways  quite   dark,   black-brown,   or   actually   black,    a   color   that 


80  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

changes  in  intensity  even  during  the  first  year,  the  tendency  being 
for  the  pigment  to  segregate  towards  the  sides  of  the  scales  (less 
frequently  to  the  posterior  part  of  the  scale) ,  thus  leaving  contrast- 
ing lines  in  the  ground  color.  These  light  and  dark  lines  are  re- 
ferred to  as  secondary,  and  when  present  never  have  the  clean-cut 
distinctness  of  those  forming  the  primary  color  pattern  (multi- 
virgatus).  Sometimes,  too,  the  darker  pigment  on  the  head  will 
tend  to  arrange  itself  so  as  to  appear  to  form  the  "bifurcating" 
head  lines.  These  are  always  less  distinct  than  when  these  form  a 
part  of  the  primary  pattern. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


81 


1 

a 
"3 

CD 

a. 

/. 

E 

j= 

c 

■— 

-•— 

'5 

c 
a 

_c 

a 

j. 

01 
43 

a; 

cS 

-•- 

c 

cjc 

C 

c 

c 

J= 

c 

'3 

-~ 

as 

>. 

S 

- 
— 

& 

c 

c. 

» 

*— 

w 

c 

c 

c 

*? 

w 

s- 

£ 

<^ 

Q 

0) 

a> 

fc 

= 

Cj 

* 

5 

< 

53 

— 

ft 

DC 

3B 

5" 

— 

a. 
c 

o 

'— 

%— 

- 

w 



c 

c 

CO 

c 

03 

S3 

« 

CD 

Cj 

"ta" 

GC 

4= 

CJ 

CS 
c^ 

ft 
en 

c 
o 

w 

-*— 

ea 

a> 

= 

CD 

^3 

c 

t3 


— 
DC 

- 

- 


CS 


— 


in 

c 


C      eS      t"      5 

>        2 

-ill 


c 
oo 

-d 

c 

3 

of 

c 

CJ 


> 

o 


c 

gj 


-  >. 

-  S3 


=  Z  : 


ft   L 

a.     z 

oo  g  •- 

'£,£.!      r- 


— 


02 


J3  ^ 


■  -X    _*      X      £ 


'•"        •  = 


=  s 


c  ■£ 

P" 

J-4" 

crj    - 

CO 

0 

K>> 

>.  T3 

. 

(0 

s  _. 

CO 

c. 

c  — 

— 

V 

> 

o 

43 

<D 

< 

a; 

>.    - 

t« 

a>     - 

CD 

o 

J*  - 

_= 

^~ 

"C  — 


52 


I.     c 
£    i- 


.2    , 

■-    i. 

&  x 


c   q 


oo  g    O 

.£  a  s 

C  QJ     O 

4)  >    •- 

s  =  s 

"3  3    ° 

S  £  ■£ 

S  >,  o 


9>    3    O 

j:    «  -r 

^    3    o 

_    ...  *- 

j. 


CC  c  "^ 

«  I  £ 

5  c  <3 

i-  2  .' 

£  c  2 

g  *  ° 


w  so 

i  O 

oc  C. 

J  p 

i  is 

"S  S3 


§3 


^  a  _  ^ 


~     O 

_   a 


*  -s 

o  -8 

5   e 

c. 

00 

S  S 

-  s 

^  J3 


c  2 

O    ■— 
"    o 


r.     O     q 
'5     '/     B 


C     c 


0,  » 

*n  ^* 

«  OJ 
OQ 

b  d 

=3  * 


p  ~ 

°     03 
IS"! 


o   — 


_    - 


—  .a   oj   3 


<  - 


CJ     03 

-    c 
o   b 


c    o 

c.  — 

7     - 


Si-uS 


5  5 

=  ^c 

c  ~ 

■t  S 

g  I 

C3  tC 


n 


-3     c 


—    —     T      X      C    ^    — 


oa  —    t-    — 


c.       —    c 


i:  -g  ■ 

o  _     fc 


X 


-  £  i 

S-  -  C3 

>  3  C 

°  5  <r- 

h  ©  a 

-  E  1 
.S  JJ  E 

■  »  - 

-i  •=  t 

7!  r-  <- 

S  ®  OS 

"5  ft 

s  -  >> 

S  c  - 

QJ  X  .— 

I  ^  : 

a    =3  U 

c  u  c 

5  x  i 


-   X 


— 

o 

— 

CJ 

s- 

X 

= 

- 

O 

-E 

**"' 

c 

OQ 

o 

E  d 

-  c 

a  2 

Cy  3 


JC 

>1 


7 

03 

C. 

o 

oj 


o   o 
"B   ° 

si     C 
C     3 

c.  c 

3     ..    03 

5  2  ■* 

03 


M  J3 

^  g 

—  OQ 

O  — 
OJ 

CJ  w 

03  C 

~  - 

i  E 

^  o  _ 

_  Q.    o 

C  3 

a  o 


3s- 

*  11  s 

0)     s     3     B 

slog 


00 


-C  ■- 

03  OJ 

§  g 

I  '5 


:  -  -  c3 

"S  ~  s 

C  3  .3 

.X  i  K 

K    -  O  4) 

=3  ^  d 

u     u  E  3 

5  OJ  oj 

m     >-  O  2 

t.     -  ^  J3 

OJ    ^  oo  -+> 

K        C  -S  d 

„    ~  O  o 

-5    cj  *  ,— ' 

5-  "3  ■ 

■g    c  J  » 

03     O  .C  g 

3    d  3  > 

03    •—  S  j 

t-    ^  03  03 


2  d 

—  c 

d  c 

O  3 


tj     r  cj  *" 

~"    2  d  x 

"3  -g  -  » 

g  |  8  3  I 

-     >     »  c,  "- 

*   --   t  =  £ 

X  •—  w 

O  — 
O 


CO 

5      OJ     g 


-    -C 


—  c. 

2  u 

3  Oj 

o  S- 

>-  Q. 

—  d 

OJ  ^- 

X  o 


_   E  —  t 


_     _  w  cj 

O    ^  ^  m 

'     ■!  C  K 

—  .5  ~  c 

■-  c  d  to 

is    c  •"  •- 

•  -.  tr  x 

/.     bt  3  > 

U)     o  S  O 

bt  C  >- 

3      X  I-  r 

£  %  s  - 

C.  "—  03 


X 


c3  a 
-  o 
£    ? 


C3     r. 
—     I 


£  .5 

£-= 

—  c 

—  03 


.- 
CJ 

"  < 

P)  d 

I  *- 

OS  ^ 

1—1  ffj 


•a    u 

^~  d 


c  - 

03      "■  c  — 

x  ^  C.  ^ 

c      C  X  .  - 

O     03  .^  C, 

£     i  P  ' 

O  i_  -. 

~    r  c3  £ 

-  -  -  M 

CL  M  t. 

-  £  c  c 

■2   -g  03  O 


03 


-     "     =     X 
0?     OB     C  "°- 


a  3  a  | 

^    o    ?    = 


C  m 

O  x 

>-  03 

—  — 


o3  cj 

C  c 

0)  cc 
oj 


bl 


CJ    I — 


O 


00 


9 

I     5 


fc  s  a 

O   "cj     » 
u   •—     3 


-*     d   _ 
X     O     - 


•S         e  •=    # 


5      CO  " 

?  Si  ■» 

n    *  P 

O       L,  ^ 

14    03  C 

M  .S  a 

.S  'Z  Kl 


03     X 

cj    s 

—    o 
„     J- 

M 


Ji!   da 

u    cc 
03      I 


*3      03 

ji 


x    c3 


-  C 

E  8 

cr     O  x 

S   -  x 

~    a  c 

03      C  X 


bt    -    <_ 


£    C    .3 


J!     c3 


03 

X  =3  ~ 

r  3  o3 

c  x  — 


>.        ^ 


o  K 
Z 

Q 
P 


-    - 
a> 

c    o 

2  s 
~    o 


03 

C. 

E 
o 


03  -X 

J=  03 

9  S 

3  CV 

d  x 

03  C 


CJ  — 

CJ  — 

O  53 

■-  o 

3  ^- 

9  ^ 


Jl 


—  -c 
=  2 

g     03 


~    — 


O    OS     B     J- 


—      d      » 

1*8 

E  .g   I 

„.    ej   <5J 
3    K 
P    -,- 


J3     - 

-  J  d 

CJ  O 

-d  -a  £ 


=     03   5 
O      . 

fe    P    « 


_    o 

.1   £ 

X     3 


d  .  03 

03  j?  CJ 

bt  o3  f 

3  s  M 


X  o 

3  3 
X 

0i  -^ 

03  2 


d 

M  03 
—  JZ 
~       - 

03     _ 
3 


■S     03 


x   Jji 

r 


g    CJ  £ 


3 

'5 
■a 

03 


2     « 

5| 

°  E 

ej  •  ~ 
d  s 
O    5 

>>   c 


■c  = 


OJ 

- 


33     - 
X     d 


bt  .3    _ 


-3     3-  -3    '3     ^ 


—      3      X 

-      OJ 

O       . 

3 
03 


03    ^ 


o  2 


3    O 
X     3 


03 


03    J5 
cj    — 


a 


X     bl 


03  ? 

■8  x 

ir  £ 

o3  a 

o.  .. 


o 


C     c  ^ 


0] 

J3 

s 

oj 

B 
o 


01 

-3 


03 


3 

e* 

o 


5_g 

E  § 
c  > 

73  >• 


E  ^ 
o 


Cj    3 


OJ  £ 
C  CO 

O   _ 

o.s 

w.  — 

OJ     J 

Sb.5 
'a  is 
CS   bt 

*  £ 

oo    O 

3  p 

8 


Cj       . 

8-3 

8  0j 
3J3 
Efi   u 

*  bt 
3 
3 


(j — 1123 


82 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


D 


I 
s 

O 
H 


o 

w 

s 

w 
o 

CO 

w 

o 
w 

Pm 
CO 

W 

a 

H 
O 


CJ  ♦i 

SO  3 

3.  ° 

71  d 

00  OS 

9  S 


a)    en 

3  is 
1(2 


£,    O     ci     oo 


TS     c3 


"3    CO 
"3     — 


OJ 
S- 

o 

- 


3 
to 


o 

Q 


03    w 

e 


00 

11 

a 

3 

a 

0 

0 

o 

CO 

CJ 

CJ 

i. 

0 

cj 

00 

00 

'5 

ft 

-i 

5 

.2 

- 

CO 

Cj 

> 

33 

_^J 

E 

a 


■f  a 

to  a 

.5  S 

S3  oj 

"«  a 

.  o 

03 

a  B 


S  5  'H 

M    S     oo 

C      C      OJ 

a    d  -a 
O    3     oo 

j-,  £  -o 

O  — '    a 

■si" ; 

O   «•-. 

*-"  o 

>      0)     CO 


.3 

C  a 

73 

oj   «~ 

_>> 

a  < 

3   ^ 

00 

D 

00     oo 

-    — 

a 

CB     03 

o 

..  J3 

OJ 
00 

o 

*     3 

2  3 

X) 

-     — 

© 


*^  .■ 

^S     ci     oo 

>->   sf  "3  13 


u  o 
a   « 

O      M 

sS 

~~  - 

_r  oj 

"3  a 


a 
a 
a  • 

o> 

I    ' 
oo 


-o  g 

.  a 

03  « 

Ml  .. 

a  t. 

O  03 

u  v 


03     oj 

£  -9 


is   ° 

03   ,£3 


-3  5 
00      3 

a  es 
5  a 
-a   ° 

OJ    to 

a  Jt 
»>  2 
-I 

.■a  & 

to    3 


a   . 

O  13 

si 

o  _ 

a  o 


00 


3  O 

oi 

d 


a  -a  "E 

S3   73     O 

o  a  — 


o  a, 

oj  =■ 

'i  5 

a  m 

O        QQ 

73  « 

.2   a 

—     03 
<5 


Q 
Q 


a  cj 

c3   .(J 
^      03 

a  3 

to  K 

W     • 


CO 


>i 

OJ 

0 

73 

iC 

a 

0 

3J 
00 

OJ 

O 

5 

so 

0 

~ 

>>    03 

3  £ 

•  S      OJ 


a  <_ 
o  *> 
00    S 


=3 

so 
a 
o 


o 

73 


■S     >> 


03 

a 


°  J5 


a  ^ 


a  .a 
>   00 

o  < 


>«^ 


03   — . 

so 

-  Q 


o 


m    ?3 
oj     ^ 

o 

|S 

al 
to  fi 

h  e 


°  s 

OJ     3 


■a 


a 

a 
oj 

a 
■5 

o 

M 

.a 

J3 

00 
13 

CJ 

03 

3 


3 
73 


o 


73    > 

-o  a 
_    «> 

"3  2 
a  o 
73  M 
3  t. 
.-y   o 

to    oj 

§^ 

T    o 


a  OS 

ss-s 

*3  a 

53  >. 
a  — 

03     03     ^ 

«£  Is 

s 

12    . 
3  w 


fc  hi 

Q 

Q 


to 
1>J 


o    _ 


a    a 
OJ  ^3 


<    3 

5  Q 

2  :- 

a  t 

•r    * 

a  *s 

>>  S 

to  a 
W    o 

CO 
OO  CO 
Eh       tl 


oj    « 
5  « 


1- 



0J 

- 

to 

a 

2 

03 

-«-- 

00 

eu 

'4= 

0 

OJ 

5   2 

bi)   <u 

c3     2 


^     -^     -v     §> 


.2  -e    ^3 

(-1  J_.  --H 


a  cj 

5  3 

o  s 

■s  o 


3    ' 


O     03 

S   a 


o   03 


OJ 


03   ^3 

a  _,  03 

00  a  cj 

i3    ^  B 


a 

00 

OJ 

-« 

00 

a 

CO 

- 
si 

"a 

0 

_>. 

"oj 

CJ 
£h 
03 
CJ 

00 

03 
3 

.2 

73 

OJ 

a 

a 

0 
CO 

S3 

"a 

a 
0 

— 

a 

<*- 

CJ 

.0 

o 

oo     00 


•     O 

a     - 
5   & 


a  .0  2 


o 

a  a 

00  3 

o 

CJ  ^»- 

a  >> 

10  oj 

r-  3 

a  00 

o  a 

-a 

t)  OJ 

oj  a 


.2  S 

O     o3 


0  E 

0  O 

a  y=, 

o  a 

■•3  a 


3     O 

13  '^ 

-H      OJ 


o  -a 
a    a 


a  ~ 


OJ      OJ 

t  -a 


o 


"-3 


to  ^S 
0    OJ 


o  ^ 

u  .2 

a<= 
a 


"2  *  ■" 

.a  -a   00 

J3     0J.2 

*)   a   oj 

1  °  s 
■°-*  * 

a3  g  J 


a  £?  * 


^  a   „ 


-t-5 

o 


-a 


^  01 


^5     -^        OJ 

73    oo    .a 
OJ     o3     = 


tO     00 
OJ      u- 

a    o 


a 

J3 


C4-H  O 

51  i  J 

G    ^-  C 

O      02  CQ 


la  5  cq    o  •-: 


03    .2 

S   a 


a   o  -3 

CJ    —  - 

■0       m  -^ 

Oj       CJ  oj 

~  —  a 

a  -^  — • 

..03 

x    tn  a 


oj 


4. 


3   3  —  -33   & 


3     M^ 


a 

a 

to  •«    oj 


tO     03 


a  -3   ° 


0  § 

00  cl 
oj 

oj  a 


>>    03 

"3  S 


Z  3 
i  § 
o  .5 
*  -a 


■a  a    & 


.2    » 


■a  —  oj    a 


r>>    ^       cj  tn 

r3  >>  »  <; 

3    o3  »— «  a 

^^  £  3 

a        o  oj 
.a 


O     c3 
CJ     OJ 


ii     =3 


73 

a 

03 


O     1 


00  JL 

g  -3 

00  3 

oj"  — 


m  a 
•a  M 
.5   a 


o 

J3 


00    -< 


/. 


OJ   73  O 


5= 

73     O 
33    = 

>,£ 

■°     OJ 

"8  2 

a- 


3  a 

73  -o 
a   a  i 


CC    — 3      03      ^ 


0  -J    o 


00      oj      °3      OJ 


-a   o. 


o 

05 

~r 
>-  OJ     1    ^" 

0  "3   "3   73 

oj  o    «1 

«  m  a  'si 

5  a  «ffl 

-  S3^ 

^  «  •-  § 

I  *  &1 

O  03     S. 

o        _.  —    a 

B        «  -9   « 


VJ 

a 

S3 

_CJ 

a 
S 

"o 

si 

J3 

GO 

00 

S 

O 

03 

O 
5= 

>> 

43 

o3 

^3 

O 

>i 

OQ 

a 

^J 

«*- 

OJ 

73 

O 

0 

OJ 

fc- 

-     — 
Ci     03 

»  73 

OJ       r- 

^5 


3 


d    S 


a  o 

03      00 

SO  S     o 

a   03  73 

a  a  oj 
e  "a 
a  •-  -^ 
o-     - 

>   a  -3 

O     03 
>>    M    o 

•°   o   S 

a 


OJ      00 

o  "2 


OJ 


D    73 

SO     „ 


si  a 

»  3 

so  S 

£-,  f-J 


>.    03 

^     of 


a   ?   a   0       -_ 


03  a 
S  13  s 
3    03    3 


o 

_3  S 


o    OJ 


i2   a   oj  — 


^   o   a  — 

1    2    a 


r    a 
3   3 


.a   oj  oj 

—  -a  rf 

CJ     -^  ^ 

■a  Q  73 

0  "^  a 

00    J;  c3 

.i3   .2  — 

'3  'S  03 

a  v,  •- 

J  OJ 


2  «  -3 

•t    ca   oi 

S  13 


a  5 


.    o   a 

i  &  * 
s  £  >i  -^  ^ 


03     OJ 

a  *» 


oi    ^^ 


U     O 


03    +3 


03     £ 
73     03 


3  m 
a  T3  5? 


.H  - 

■3  '3 
S;   si 


j3   "i  a 


2?  2   s 


tic 

«.s 

S  .a 

2.2. 


£   2 


S  -a 


a3  c   oj  ^3 


O 


n  w 
fe 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


83 


(35 


c  — 

<U     to 

3'g 

■  -»    1) 

a  § 

a   5 

03     a 


of  ;- 

E  _ 


o   ^  J2 


S-. 

b 

CJ 

. 

il 

*-. 

t- 

C» 

CJ 

V 

■s-. 

- 

£ 

bl 

a 

/. 

^ 

S  03     O 

—  .    o 

bfl    oo    i* 

2  Ijs 

Si  U      53 

»-  «__    o 

.5  -C     St 

°o  -i    X 

fcH  £      o 

O  aj    "3 

2  =   5 

-►>  T3 

~  j= 

.2  ^   - 

«  5 

g  O      B 

a  T  .2 


3   S 


T3 


03     i- 

CD     — 

3     =3 


3D     *d 


_      

T3     2 
§    O 

S  -5 

—  B 

-    - 

ti   * 

—  J2 

"2   o 

3    a- 

*       - 

OQ 

hi    o 


«  §• 

x  U 

03   ^ 


0 

— 

tN 

O 

tN 

— 

CN 

"" 

/.' 

- 

' 

^ 

O 

0 

(a 

**1    — 


«     S 

a   a 

2  ft) 


QQ  O 

,o  3 

o  •- 

~  :a 

60  S 

a  S 

-  tu 

>f  s 

.2  ft) 

03 


O     « 

3  !S 


a    i 


03    £ 

a  a) 
jj  "3 

Cj      00 

*  •£ 
cj   o 

So 

n 

3     OJ 

*".    *^ 

•  —       t- 

J    o 


0J  a>  o 

t,  s  cj 

_a  o  x 

-A;  CJ  0J 


3     oj 

"  i 

a  .S 

—  03 

tm  cj 

—  03 

„   o 

a-i 

0J    v~; 


rl     A. 


3 
■—  _   _tt      m    g 


o    E    S    -:    s 


o 

OJ 

O 

03 

3 
■3 

a 

J. 

£ 

> 

— " 

33 

3 

^r 

a> 

c 

a 

•  -    03 


o     tu 


O   ~ 

00     oj 


O     OJ 
^    A3 


03    ~     M     "S 
•   ^3     03    — •       03 

■=3   o?S  £   ^ 


—    p 


O      Q     00    -• 

^^         r-         fl\      n 


O     03 


s  -s 


.S  "3  a 

«   =  n   ■ 


a   so  T3 

c3     0)     c 


!l 


sa 

> 

cu  'S 


t-  — •  .s   » 


—     6C 


„  -a 
3  g-* 


v      ^T!     aa  y 


S 

•  -  oq  a 

4)  —  —     w 

t-  03  — - 

«  —  o3     to 

5  ?  =    = 

a  *  -   t 


a  so 

03  a 

3  "ft 

oo  a 

OQ  o3 


0J 

a 
o 
O 


> 
o 


OQ 

"<J 

cj   sB  c 
"3  S-S 


J. 


/- 


X 


<o 


B  !>  rl     W 

O  ?  —       - 

oq  *^  .  -     =: 

33  03  CO   ft) 

OJ  00  OJ 

—  o3  a 

-  "s  = 


os  o  i: 
oj  a  a 
r-  _    o 


■a 

0J 


is  £ 


-At  (-.  ^ 

ffl  »  C 

"3  'S  ■* 

<<  -3  O 


o  £ 

2;  .2 


o 

"A3 


o     ° 


a  < 

O     A- 

•  -  a 

03 


--3  ° 

►  s| 

-^  ^i  is 

Of." 
3      03      £ 


>>  — 

IT  oj 

.2  > 


2a| 

a  .=    2 

o  —  a 

60    u    S 

.2  S  cq 

a    3  w 

•a   ° 

^  a  £ 

cj   — <    03 

s  S| 

2     01     3 

0Q      A" 

•a  e  " 
a   a   » 

03     »    60 

8 -a  ° 

AA  t^  LH 

03     oj   '2 


QJ     "^ 

a   2 


o3  a 


cj  •-<  J-  — 

^^  0J 

S  ^  S  S  I 

3  ~  •-  a  o 

*a    ^,  ^r  ^  a 

«*A         00  O  |A 

*  •=  °  "  s 


O         a         A. 

2,  "a    a 


"2  js  a 

0J      0Q      O 

a  =  3 


«  .2  r: 

>      to     oo 
O      3J      O 

-  ^  c 

* - ^3  ^T 

In      C3     ♦- 

J7    -     G) 

O    «      0) 

■3-3  & 

a2 - 


00 


03    '-° 

■"     OJ 


c3  +j  o 

-3  *a 

~  0  3  oo  .s 

60  •"*  3  ^i    a 


2  -    o 

S  M    «• 

•a  a   •: 

oj  a    — 

60  o    E 

s  >>  s 

"a  .2  o 

OJ  _  oo 

o  h      ■ 

J3  0J     0J 


en   a 


A"         00          A  -       FH 

O  _     g  oo     0J 

"T   2   a  S   « 

>>  a    ^  ?   oj 

-a  g  ja 


60    03 

a  a 
'a  -a 
■a  oj 
.2,  a 

-3  "3 


OJ     S 

.      oj    o3  a 

a       «  ° 

%•  •  « 

o    a  -.  a 

3  o3 


03   ' 


OJ 


oo  js  Js  £ 

a    °    i3 

a     03     o3 


03  Q, 

•"  AJ 

g  a 

o  a 


03 


a   £ 
a   a  -S 


03 
a 
03 
OJ    -     - 

Jr  °°  •> 

At  n    J 


03 
O 

(A 

03 
13 

a 

03 


0J 

"3 
a 


oj 

> 

"3 

-a 

tA 

03 
■S 

o 

SO  ^-a 

a  so 

a  » 

-a  a 

a  .- 

OJ  — « 

aJ  aj 

CJ  O 

a  -a 

:a  o3 

OJ  J3 

.a  o 

A         >>  ^ 

S  "^  - 

O     o  to 

'el  -a  s 


CJ         A 


03  c  a> 

—  «  " 

TJ  o^  AAJ 

5  £  a 

.5  '  ■* 

S  a  S 

S  a  a 


a1  a 
.2  » 

B  *■ 

o3  ta 


e  Ji 

3     3 
>»    03 

a   oc 

i*8 

o    > 

■°  5 
a    >- 


2   >> 
a  ^3 


.a   ea 
*  3 


co 


§.  2    6f 

0     JJ    _0J 

t~  g 

hfin 

°  2  to 

0J        G      12 

a  -a  'S 

°  £  5 
w  *  J 

'-T   2  « 

SjSS 

oJH   S 
a        3 

a   S  *) 


03 

•a 


o 
s. 

03 
a    o 


oo    x 

IS 


"to  C 

—  o 

^^  E 

a  t.   o 

>  a   K 

§  a  - 

g  »  - 

0J 


0J 
'3    "el 

CJ 

^  -3 

03     h 


^  s 

03 

CJ  CO 

00  £a 


2  a 
-*  "3 
2  a 


-a 

5  s 

60  2 

•-H  00 

OO 

!>.  c 


^A     ri   T:    •— 


cj     oj 

~B  "3 


£   o 


a  _, 

oo    oj 


3 

00 


-      OJ 

-  a 


zz 

■5 

03 

3 

E 

.. 

00 

AJ 

Lh 

OJ 

-5 
oj 

ta 

« 

3 

.A 
CJ 
OQ 

CO 

CN 

I 


•a     oo     O 

cj  JS    o 

>  .3  •§ 
t<  13  oj 
3.23 


_•  "as 


>.  — 

■a  a 

r>  o3 

a-"  PI 


03 

0J       A^ 

a  2 


OJ  **A 


03  o  a 

00  »7     " 

03  <* 

a 

1  o" 


<«>  u  a.  S 

oj   o  ja  a 

3    "  2 

2  i?  -S  W 


•S  J3 


o  „ 


O 

o 


o 

03 

(A 

a 

a 

03 


Q 

Q 


o3  r 

CJ       A-I 

02 
CJ 

o 


33 


84 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


b  .IT  J3  "0     • 

K   o    =•   c   s 

3     <D   ^     3 

.2    a    °    2    » 

1:2  S  -.« 

3    <p  *""  s-'   u 

«?  .9  J      1 

3     M    g.ci 

0>    *J^    —     IC 

-C     -     c8       . 

*  S  a  § 

I'S-i  * 

-°   3  .3  <u 

„-      -°  > 


e 

Ed 
P 

z 
z 

a 
i 
z 

z 

< 

o 
w 


fa 
O 
W 

S 
£> 

H 


a 
o 

H 

Ph 
02 

fa 

H 

O 
H 

>< 

fa 


s 

.0 


-2    > 

0)      Di      O 


a  -b  "3  -S 

3    •»■-  03  c3 

-O     ..  O  _ 

«  >,&2 

c  "o  ~  "S 

o    o  ft -2 

JD  C  ci 

°  ^  V,  a 

^"S  ft  E 

ip    C  3  p 

3  CO  £ 

'S  "3  »  in 

—    3  to  c 

ID          3  t>  ~ 

t.    0  os  rt 

.    I-  —  w 

10  ,-"  t.  * 

cd  o  S  .- 

s  "o  x  t:  ~ 

a   .1  "3  <D     c8 

SS  os  c  -a 

J3    CN  t.  <u     oj 

<n      -    —  ~0     3 

S   •"  •-  J-1  s 

cd  Ji;  3  cd   cd 

>    o  1)  C£ 

cs    «  >  T  -S 

M  .  «    2 

co   —  ^  T3    en 

c3    >  C  3    ce 

-    «  K  §  -B 

*i     °^     —  u     c 

is^  S  3    <d 


■.-   5      B 


X' 

-  9   ■  8 

*    £     -'C  "2 

^     o     OJ     Bj  c 

4     g     s  S  S 

S1    <7    '"     g  ■" 

§   .&    M     «S  S 

.=    3 
•«      co 


S 


o  c 

c  « 

^-"  =c 

e8  . 

X  ID 

o  2 

a  £ 
c 

■5  E 

c  •„- 

o  J5 


c    — 

J-    o 


c  g 

li   5  i 

ti   "C  ^_ 

c    c  ° 

"       C  Oy 

^       fl)  t) 


O    IN 

ft      . 


2   * 

fc  P 


C3     CD 
08 


*i     """  ~Z 


-a 

£.  m 
o 

< 

6 

c 


to 


C8  t. 

en         _£; 
73   ^    C 

lis 

0)      «    > 


(8  ,^    s-       o 

S    W      O        <D 
bfi  -CO 

£     S      fc        S 

.^    l-M  — 

"8  «?  1    ! 

-   E   g    ° 

c,  _o  *l 

-e   E 

c   * 
<c   E 

=S  < 
^  *~ - 


O     O 

£.= 

CD 

E   05 

a  — ' 

^  J 


C     C     © 
C3   — ' 

v  —   ce 


T3 
o8 


K3 


O 
ft 

C 

o 


a 


3  M  60 

°  JJ  3 

E  5  e 

id  rt  ^ 

*  l!  u 


'o  M  ~* 
«  «  » 
C   (J     » 

s    E 


—         c 


0)     c 

E  o 

ID    00 


o    P 


T3  en 

CD  08 

—        .       C  CD 

3     «     —  S 
r*    "w'        I 

.2    e      ?  ■» 

"O     08      >  C 

CD    —      IE  ti 

£  £    ■-  > 


°     .   S3 

ee  -3 


II 

T3    05 
cu    t^ 


rt  •—     CD      £,• 


a; 


^      03    CO 


=3      X 
..    08 

o    £ 


c    c 


M  3 

»-;  2 

o  g 

05  £ 

«  3, 


T3 
3-  .9 

O     08 

CD 

CD      - 

'c8    en 

g     CO 

02  J£ 


03  .- 

3  in 

<n  J3 

3  3 

■-  -a 

■<*■     08 

N   c 

>.  •- 


-  >> 

<c  — 

<N      - 


08  5 
o  c3 
»     ft 


3 

CD 

-O 

CD 
3 
CD 

-o 


o 

ft 

£ 

CD 


08 
T3 
3 
O 


ft 
ft 
3 


3 
O 

M 

C 


5  «= 

^3  T3 

X!  3 

OV  5 

3  « 


M    O 

a  tj 

_     03 

3     o 
08     CO 

^    Cm 
ID    ** 

£  -o 

3 
»     =3 

~     08 
in 

■-  2 
=  £ 


O     08 
CD    .9 

"S  O 


M 
3 
CO 

3 
C 
P3 


3  CO     - 

V        °  5 

2         ft  02 

■3       .     H   ^ 

s  £  °    ■ 
J^  £  £ 

^j:-  e 
3  »  g  „ 

S  la    >-  » 

CD      tn      « 


08  ~ 

ft  3 

>,  O 

T^  u 

c8  —     c3 

ID 
3 

•~  ce 

S  -5 


>>  ® 

t.  _  00 

T3  1 

c  -^  '£ 

O  <D  ^ 

CD  *  £ 

c-  — .  o? 

<D  T?  'D 

>  ID  CO 


o 

CO 


CO 


3  S  d 

E  -I  £ 

3  -C 

Be 

S  «  | 

m  a  "« 

5  3  » 

*  O  » 

o  O  g 

CD  08  S 

£  £ 

03  CD 

tf  06 

E  > 


3     3 
-     S 

.38 

3  3    <D 

^-  3     N 

3  •  — 

o  3     <° 

^  °     H 

O  M    tj 

id  .9  £ 

a  «  - 

co  c    CO 

i,  h    IN 

O  3     I 

.3  *—   -^ 

S  3  « 

In  £    cd 

O  3     > 

3  3"- 

O  c8     cd 


m    cd   ,     c  !J 

__     3   "C     3  08 


3  > 

>-  O 

£  -° 

"*"  03 


.*  .2  * 


C     3 

■B  -r 
B  a 

08     CD 

°-    % 
CD 

-O     m 

CD 

3     '- 

I  s 


CD      03  -^08(3; 


3     S   _D     3  - 


s  a 
2 


■V  x. 


•°  a 

08   ~ 


<   S 


=3    < 

3 


3  a 

5 


& 

o 
Z 


o 


fa 


CD 

_-      CO 

e  I 
o 

II 


3 
O 


—      u    CD 

a  "3 


CD 

-*j     CD 

CD     08 

>,8 
"8-E 

3     3- 

a  o  cd 

*»     S  -B 

j;     CJ    D 

M    3    „_ 
SS    O 

— !     »     ID 


T3     " 

.!s  oo 

^±> 
§1 

/-.      CO 

3    3 

J3     •- 


CN 

3* 
O 

CO 

a 
S 
o 

J3 

H 


i 

E 


*   ^  -  tS 
j?        S 

2    »  E 

3   -g  co 

m     ..  # 

O   T3  O 

s   cd  a 
..  a  o  — 

t,      0)    —      « 

id  T3    cu  ~ 
»   -3     e     3 

j  s2  .2 

M    >>  _     « 
3   ■—     03   ^ 

2  1  55.2 
■b  -9  -g  M 

— *     ^^      03    i—l 


TS    JS 
3     03 


3  v 

a  S 

>-»  3 

co  ^ 

a 

cd 


aJ  js  3 

+3       CO 

3 

3 

3 

03* 
£ 


b  -a 


CD  3 

.3  o 

♦^  "^ 

-3  3 

.5"  =3 

T.  "3 

CD  ^ 

3  -^ 

J2  CD 

.3  J= 


"en  5  o 

co  co  -rt 

c3  <D  ^ 

ft  CD 

D  O  D 

3 


£     _>>    O 


to 


c8 

03 

3 

<p    .-  .^. 

o  "S  n 

C     MS 
-     3 


co 


CD 


ys  ^>iJ 

"31  js 


u  be 

O  3 

«  O 

S^ 

^  "o 

>>  ID 

a  co 


03 

'3 

3 

a 

03 
C8 


■B    S  ~ 

43       Cu 


3  S  CO 

oo  t"  35 

ID  ■-  . 

—  3  CD 


^     CD 


3     03 


13  X 

CD     ID 


>  -a 

C3      CD 


03 

u 

JS 

CD 

i 

01 

CN 

C 

3 

o 

^j  a 

03  — 

o  03 

<—  »    £ 

°  «    £ 

.S  So 

II  o      . 

co  -3     CD 

3  ...2 

c8  '—'     en 

^  O    E 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


85 


a 

H 
D 
g 

O 

O 


Z 

z 
< 

S 

a 


CO 

a 
u 

w 
o 

CO 

g 

o 

a 

Ps 
CO 

K 
H 

O 

>< 
H 


oo 


S     cm 
-     3 

5  S 


x  2 

o  ts 

~  3 

7  * 


C   _ 

?   - 

E   £ 

:  - 

o  a 

■aJS 

-  .'    - 

•=.£■* 
*  -  « 
>■  *  S 

-  =  e 
Sit 

£   o    fe 

»i  « 
2*   * 

-  t.  J3 
__      4)    -*^ 

2  58  O 
O  ~     = 

C.    c3   _ 

b    c 


=    o  '3 

a    o  " 

o    o  ^ 

x    52  ej 

-  —  — 
a  o 

a  - 

-  ~  f, 

■-    fe  .3 

-  '  - 

sag 

4.    o  P 

tc 


■   ~ 

~.   Z  - 

a    jt  o 

*  ■»  & 

I-  "=  o 

s  -  >- 

"3  -O  >> 

c  _2 

-  s  « 

S     y  CJ 

§  ><  '3 

ja:    . 


7    5 

2   % 

0  >> 


S  °  3  .2 
*"    >>  o 


3 
-3 

=3 


l] 
5    4> 


^    c 

-u     C3 

cm   o 

3 


4. 


2  £ 


**       X 

>     =3 

>>.2 
2  * 
5  5 


00  — 

41  41 

.■S  c 

*  a 

.  -  - 

cm  ^ 

a 


00 
1^ 


0>  0)  -— . 

Cf  —  - 

<~  •-  2. 

^  J  O 


a    o 


_     =8 
O 


3  -r 


-  i 

u     X      X 

l     "l 

-  7   c 
c:  »  X 

J  N    o 

~  5  ° 

2  2  x 

Eh  4) 

4)      4>    ^H 

-  ~    «* 

-  ?. 

S    °   c 

=8     x     £ 

-     .-     4) 
~      X     "£ 

3  —    5 

s-s| 

-  .S    X 

^     c*  ^" 


4)     38     S 

sis 

^    o    ,; 

=    >>.2 

.  .2  =   - 

3  "S  §  g 

s 


CO 


£    = 


3 
:3 


a, 

- 


3 
^2 


i5   '3 


-^     S         » 


41    K) 


O       r- 


>.  B 

o    •- 


4) 


£  =3 
c3  — 
4)     C3 


-^  C3 

M  -  • 

C  u 

•r  o 

~  ft  • 

c8  2 

-  - 

|  5 

o  M  : 

M  '-S  ■ 

■5  "     , 


33     T 


41     c8 

.S  "3 

—      41 


o 

— 


>.    3 


J  s 


o 

cm 


3    J^ 
C      41 

«   - 


00 

os 

CM 

4>  ^ 

—  cj  '3 

=   '*    - 

—  *    »= 

«  a  S 


oo 

CM 

O      =      4) 

£   1   o 

s.  2    » 
3     -  3 


-  -    =    R    ?    ~ 


3  Ji 


4i    eu 

3  "5 


3     0 

5   -  . 


4i  ■: 
a  i 

CO    - 


4>    i-l 


_Q      4) 
O     > 


-     —  s  - 
I       g  «=3 

g  .S    to 

3       "S  • 


-  _  ■=>  3  ?: 
fc  2:   -  = 

g  -  J  =  - 

=-  ^  ~  -  s 

"  o   •-  o   a 

a  co  _b  •  -  «) 

—  _•   o  3t3 
5  »  Q  o  ^  * 

.3  = 


t-  t:  ■" 

2  o  •» 

S  c  s 

=  -     ; 

X  5     3 

3  s 

45  " 

X  X 

4) 


X 

>,    ii 

-3     " 
O 
J2 


i — i      cj      X    H  i« 


o    c 

h  3 

C     =3 

°  s 

OQ 

>>    . 

=8    00 


—  ^ 

_2  — 

3  " 

■i ri 

M  00 

.a  "3 

-2  — 

u  2 

c8  3 

41  C 


X 


E  o 

—  2  ^ 

11  -3  2 

DD  S  fH 

2  3  £ 

a  .3  ■*» 


i    ji    C    c  —  ^ 


C     ri  S3 

-I  g 

"3   2  H 

u     2 


O-  c8 

'X    —     3 

lit 


oo 

"8< 


-   5!   >> 


=  -='  £ 

c  »  ^ 

■a  «  % 

o  a.  M 

-  .  - 

•-  X  J) 

O  — 

a  3 


C3    *-  00 

tit  ^H 

.2  -3  — 

1    ^     2  _ 

,  5   «  S 

Q,    *-  41 


.3? 

'3 
O 
-a 
3 

2 
41 

— -    5 

6  -5 
.2    3 

x  £ 

41 


P.  "5 


M 


0) 


X 


s 


2-3- 
■  -    n 


"3  - 

-  s 

t  5 

a  o 

2  ° 

C3  2 

"3  '" 

4)  _>i 

2  5 

-  c8 

5  ° 

x  -C 

41  _ 

2  S 


§22 

41 

3 


9 

EN  £ 

N  5 

•-  "3 

cm 

.a  c,- 

■w  o 


-.  h  t* 


-^    -—     *J      K  x 

3  cm 

>>  4! 

b      4)  — • 

=3     C3  .. 


—   Si 

5^ 


.5  a  c  c  J 
—  —  o  2  ° 
<B    <o    8    S    o 


S   « 


3      4) 

c3     x 

J3 


^»2 

O    ce  _ 


^ 


-    E 


"3  ° 

§  a 

a  S 

>.  -2 


X      •-     41 

Cj     ^-      *^ 

v-    -3     =8     c3 


41      41  . 

S*  'S  X 

«'      3  J 

--   a  o 

™»   ^i  t^ 

n     01  H 


41  •- 

r:  — 

O  ^> 

z 


O 

o 


86 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


p 
g 

z, 

o 

o 


-a) 

o 


02 

w 
o 

s 

w 

o 

V. 

a 

o 

w 
Pi 

02 

w 
w 

H 

o 

H 

w 


(V  — 

J3  bf 

&  '8 

bo  >> 

a  xi 

a  oo 

-7*  C3 

?  o3    . 

"*  a 


00 


c    >> 

3     c3 

C3       09 


o   *» 


o2     O     O. 


-2  3 

03  3 

3  " 
O 


&3 


*    § 


a  °  £ 

*>  S  "8 

-°  e    c 

£  a  ° 

c  «  .2 

x  J3     - 

■3  I  * 

«  "     o 


E  21 

CN 


J-    o 

-3  3 


E  .a 


02 
CO 


co    o3 


03 


bo 

a 


a 
o 


<D 


oo 

cd 

CO 


o3 
H 


W 


11  3 

•    tS    °o 

BO      W    VH 


oo 


3  J?     OJ 

a  o  -s 


3  t* 

o  eg 

a;  a 

a  g 

■5  oo 

g  ■ 

9  a 

3  a 

a;  -j 

>■.  2 

e8  "^ 

■a  .3 

co  £ 

00  ^ 


a  & 

o  .. 

£  P 

*->  CN 


-^    p    co 

CO     O      N 


CO 


w 


~    o        ~ 


co   -^ 
*    9 

£  8 

«     3 

S'-s 

CD      fl 


CD     >U 

a  — 


o 


CO        QJ 

CO 

C 

CO 

0 

— 

t-      CQ 

Fh 

,a 

bC    ^ 

o 

B 

0 

- 
o 

CQ 

M 

\A 

C3   J2 

Pi 


►"5 
>"5 


Pi 


oo 


CO 
CO 


3 

- 

0 

1 

<0 

_c 

CN 

>, 

3 

C 

it 

CM 

« 

m 

3 

3 

H 

O 

c3 

"e* 

3 

a 

A 

0Q 

<u 

O    be    co  ^ 


£   a 

a   a 


*    c  -■    ?    s 


o 
a 

oo   E 

CN      0) 


T3 
3  .3 
CS     C3 

W  P5 


■-1      ..    -w      QJ      P,     OQ 

o     H     oj     o  C3 


X, 

.    -*^ 

O   ■£ 

CN     P 

g    ^ 

•^     3 


«S      ^      vj      %j     ^, 


ft  g 
co    £ 


1  ■* 


C3 

a 

CD 


3  T3 

CO  dJ 

^  & 

DQ  _C 

C  4» 


a,   •—    u.    >, 


cu    co 


E-c" 

s  £ 

i/i    eg 

CD    73 


.-  a; 
c3  be  t- 
u     C    .5 

«    o    5 

0  S  -2 

eo     C3     3 


> 


O 

— 
03 


cu    O 


03 


01 

cu    ** 

3     qo 

■a  e 


3  .. 

2  T3 

3  C3 

-  o 

0C  t. 

cn  j: 
I 

S  c 

CN  c! 


.     C 


K5 


£  "o    o 

'5  .2  ^ 


bt 

M    >i 

to 

3     3 
■S     O 


2  =3   E 


S  § 


g    o  - 


co    o 


- 

CO 

3 
0 

Z 
E 

CO 

>, 

£> 

fc- 

>> 

t- 

c 

— 

0 

~ 

O 

.- 

00 

C 

CI 

03 

3 
c 

- 

CO 

- 
O 

<-4— 

E 

00 
«*1 

3 

00 
— 

O 

— 

GO 

0 

>, 

"■"' 

CO 

0 

JZ> 

> 

~r. 

CO 

:s    : 

o  — . 


a  £ 

JO     oj 

Si    »i 

«     o3 

a . 


^    Si  32        _         a?  o 
03    co    00    3 

00     00  O 


bC  .2? 
3  m 
3     O 

a 


■       00 

S    3 

a  a 


Co     o 

§■?. 


CO 
CD 
CO 


03 


X     -^ 

2  "3 

.3    >- 
o    o 

3  a 


CO  >> 

'2  03 

*  l        ' 

+->  DQ 

CO  cu   . 

*  & 

o  a 


«     be 

^   £ 

CN    ~ 
03 

-LT    3 
03    t?  ' 


00 


03  Ji 

■a  c 

^.  o 

o  .0 


>>  3?  bO 

~    -•  t-t   1 

.     O     c3  03   1 


O 


so 
S  -a 

5  5 

co    rt 


CD    -^ 
S      & 

3  ^-< 
00 

CO      > 


10 

00 


CO 


O  <4) 

.2  S 

x  s 

00  [vj 


^  _«s    -e  >,— 


£  "3  -2 


co  a 

QC>  3 

03  ^1 

.2  >> 

03  g 

Pi  E 


O     03  _>> 

flJ  ..CD 

«  **r  co 

S  j=  £ 

>>  *  S 

a  —  £ 

3     ci  m 

co    3  cn 


o       .2 

S  0? 


0 

e 

3 

c 

(U 

O 

i  03 

_  E 

03  co 

L-  . — , 

O  C3 

a  *- 

c  a 

-  - 


=  3  .£ 


3   "C 
O    03 

OX    3 


§1 


O 

CD 

t*- 

fl 

~ 

03 

Fh 

_= 

43 

03 

« 

a  0 

£ 

..  0 

3 

«     CO 

2  'S 

&q 

3     CO 

*s 

00 

|e 

£:    00 

o3     ti 

ki 

2  § 

«  O 

3  •" 

a 

^      00     CO 


^    d    co 

5  E  " 

o  -r    >> 


"     c3  -3 


-3     o 


3:  P    00    c  ^ 


o3     «J 

■S     03 


O     03 

.2  a 
—  00 


3    CD 

O  >o 


to     o3 


to  «J 

— .  Ti 

2  3 

X  00 

3  >, 

^-  "B 

°o§ 


=   3^     03   - 

co     9     ft     3 


J2     o3 


3   -C 
2     3 


^     3 
O   — 


O  n  oj 
fO  ). 
O    -3    2 

C  •£  .= 


ca  ^ 
a  a; 

5  ft 


CN    .3 


0Q 

M 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


87 


; 

OS 

«o 

»o 

•* 

— 

09 

3 
o 

00 

— 

.- 

u 
0) 

e 

e 

c 

CD 

0 
- 
o 

- 

"■C 
3 

- 

- 

bl 

c 

7 

3 

0) 

c 

03 

- 

i 

ja 

r 
•J 

— 

3 

."74 

,*° 

0) 

.^ 

C  -O 

u 

*— 

£ 

J 

a. 

V 

^ 

+3 

Is 

- 

c 
c 

~s 

In 

C 

03 

c 

B 
o 

00 

_o 

'^ 

1. 

ao 

a 

t- 

~ 

- 

- 

_ 

^ 

3 

ft 

u 

t- 

ja 

c 

** 

C 

EC 

s 

o 

[-1 

i. 

V- 

c 

- 

2 

- 

- 

- 

'3 
o 

K) 

a 
o 

- 
o 

• 

r. 

c 

s 

c 
- 

- 

♦j 

~:" 

1 

or 

~ 

X 

a 

■^r 

s 

r. 

o 

— i 

Q 

V 

c 

BE 

— 
o3 

3 

- 

s 

•— 

5 

go 

x 

- 
*— 

3 

■~ 

i- 

"I 

= 

♦3 
83 

- 

■♦3 

+3 
3 

to 

C 

a 

X 

O 

. 

o 

o 

B 

^> 

"3 

= 

"3 

— 

c 
7_ 

o 

- 

43" 
u 

"*■' 

o 

o 

o 

X 

- 

3 

- 

ao 

E 

> 

43 

s 

o 

C 

"oQ 

X 
QQ 

QQ 

a) 

— 

3 

2 

= 

'a 

a 

a 

CN 

1 
CN 

1 

oo 

o 

o 

O 

QQ 
0J 

_ 

IM 

o 

CO 

O 

c 

s 

t- 

— 

s« 

' " 

c 

OS 

O 

/ 

m 

a; 

00 

J. 

o 

o 

a 

■J, 

_- 

OQ 

o 

^ 

43 

*o 

- 

» 

^C 

O 

i. 

- 

QQ 

O 

- 

u 

43 

e3 
7 

o 

o 
-— 

t* 

03 

o 

u 

- 

0 

do 

- 

ao 

- 

?3 

00 

_ 

2 

C 

- 
- 
-- 

- 

-■  o 

~ 

— 

TO 
OB    N      M 

--       |M 

OB  -rt     C 

S.    oj    » 

p,  .a  0 

■a  -s  ^ 

i  £    2 

3     O     g 

°    °    c 

OB     2 

—   •*     & 
cj   43    a 

I  »  8 

i-      C      ^ 

73      S      « 

La*" 


ao  5 

£  'S. 

«  t- 

c  o 

OB  u 

_  <» 

c3  C 

*^  r; 

■C  o 

03  — 

§  S 

—  ao 

OB  C.    O 

fc-  ^      OB 

|  ftg 

5  S     03 


£ 


o  O 


03 


c    a 


—      CB 


o  ^r 

-2     03 


60    O 


*     >■    S     -3 


«5 

4f 

a.S  | 

^  O  « 

OB      O      co 
>   T3     3 

°£   e 
«^| 

S     cS   "° 

£   a    o 
c  la    5 

§   £   § 

1     O^ 

•S  OQ 

3  "-' 
3 

"o   S 

7.      3 


t».2       o 

J3     "-  £5 

m  £       2 


03  W 

a  t- 

"^   S  » 

03    £  .2 

«x  S 

^3      -43  . 

c    .-  x 

S      CD  03 

m    £  w 

OB     g  .- 

C     it  "^ 

•—    O  0B 

M  OB 

.3  a  ^ 

03     0B  ^ 

o     M  co 


O  00  H 

S  d  ° 

CB  oo  3 

S  --oo 

3  "O  • - 

0B  ^B* 

C  3  0B 

03  0B  po 

B3  -O 


3      O) 


_•  B 


m  c  d 

4B     OB    .2 
h     O     n 

&  s|  , 

^  -^  §  s  - 

3     "0     »     cu 


p  0B 

*=  ~ 

u  3 

C3  •- 

3  co 

O  O 

°  o 

3  3 

._  OB 

-3_3 


S  &=  ft 

CO  "O 

OS" 
BOB 

.-    "  <u 

5  g  ^ 

o3     o  -*-> 

6  §  » 

TJ  ~  -3 

—  <*  "S 
i 

M 

Eh 


JS   PL, 

SB 


"  03 

a  . 

2  -3 

G  A 

o  § 


— 
a 

03 


&    X" 


£o 

&  £ 

-°  ft 

.§ ; 

~  i*  • 

OQ  *"     ■ 

&  - 

°  3 

<~  3 

S3  S 
CM 

N 

°2  'G 

<D  00 

00  w 

^i  £ 

TB 

OB  •- 

3  >> 


CO 

05 


Z2  s 

"o  e 

s  s 

3  ~ 

2  * 

G  <u 


!^ 


&  -S- 


M  T3 
x     3 


CtJ 

ft 


•2     J    O 


43        33 

O  -3 
3  3 
03 


33 


te  S      " 

O  3     O 

fcH  X      ^ 

03  M  Q 

O  3   w 

"  a  .2, 

3  ft    o3 

^ri  o3   pq 

"3  t>  — 

>§  >    3 

^  O    cj 


1-5 
>-5 


S  E 

..     X 

X     OB 

S  .5 

o  — 


c 

<N 


^     M     C3 


03 

CB     03 

X    — 

-  T3 

CO    3 

cn   c« 


2  "o 
?  to  £ 
IS    <*    o 


3 

&9 


o 

>-4      •»     >-. 


bO 
tn     G 


G    <u 
w     ao 

M  S 

3  ft 

•-S  -B 

c3  03 

S  c 

I! 

X 


32 


w    ir:    < 

4-^      x      > 


3  ^: 

—  - 

3  x 

c3  j2 


3     •- 

-a 

CB     CB 

J3     3 

43         CB 


o  ~ 

O 

CB  3 

43  T3 

..  3 

x  03 

03  iD 


33     3 

ft 

„  ft 

OB     3 


a 


OJ 
TO 
CM 

S  S 

I5 

n    3 
«     3 

"3  O 

Sis 

CN     H 

CJ.     « 

V 


*-t  OB 

"~  J3 

*44  43 

OB  . 

3  T3 

CB  0B 

OB  ft 

■B  03 

—  33 

—i  X 

?B  3 

S  3) 


0B     O    — 


Cfi 


OB     g 
ft    3 

X 

p 

93 


E  "3 


3      P*    43 


B  ■" 

§  & 

3  c 

3  ^3 

o  a 


3  CB  J£ 

a  £ 

C3  00 

o  g 


03 
ft  ' 


.3 
'    M 

-a  — 

Ob     x 

3     x 

i  T3 
>     3 


2  c  o 

&  "" 


en    -     «  43     o 

*3        r*!     ^        X        •— ' 


CB     0B 

O    14 

X 

o 


03 
3 
S3 

X 

.    O 

T3    ft 


33      *_ 

ft      33 

-     — » 

4-    -73 

3     OJ 

'Z  1 


ft  -a 

=  s 
i;  IS 

3     ^ 
CB    TJ 


o 

o  Tb 

3  CB 

CB  3 

4-  CC 

3  V 


£    e 


0B  »-2 


33    <1 


O     3 

§2 

03  ^^ 

»•„;«! 
u     D    C 

■2   =   -3 

S  ft 

ft^>    3 
3^5 

§  g  E 

ao     G    CD 

CO     CB        - 
x   •-«     n 


?%  s 

a  ,2  £ 


03 


K 


o  o 


c 
ft 

IE 


O 

a 


Ed 


88 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


a 

Ed 
D 
Z 

Z 
o 

o 


z 
< 

s 
o 


CO 

o 

a 

o 

3 

o 
w 

(X, 
CM 

w 
x 

Eh 
O 

w 


3 
B 

OJ 
J3 
*3 

C 

o 

M 
E 


3  53 

o 
>> 

-8  S 

oj  a 

c  c 

oj  o 

"P  00 


CJ     ." 


3    p-    oj 
»    e  .2 


cu 

J3 


O     cj 
cj 

-fcJ      CO 

g   O 

*~  co 


.X     fi 

cs   h 


o3  rv 
a  " 
03   T3 


a-T 

—      CD 

03     > 
Oj   ^ 


-a  a, j 

OJ 

-*    . 
15 


S       2 


.ti  £ 
*   s 

-J     m 


.fi     CD 

ti    > 

s  ° 
|5 

fi  r3 


0) 


3     3 


co 


M      X 


cu    a 

DO       3 

s    o 


5  § 

...  f* 

JS  OJ     S 

^  go 

°  «  s 

~  *  I 


.-    —     r3     -    — 


CU    JD 


»  oo°. 
e 


o3    : 


-•   "3 

£      OJ 

-      OQ 

CO 

cu 


"3     £    -     S    —  5? 


so 


B 
cu 

"3 


CO     cu 

*  "5 


CJ- 

>. 
~a 

1 

>> 

03 


>>3. 


0) 

CO 

a 

[3 

13 

-o 

S 

a 

03 

a 

CO 

— 

CO 

<D 

*J 

V 

ja 

03 

CJJ 

*o1 

°  I  « 

Sag 

I  >■  - 

C3  ou  .3 

o  c  .. 

O-  co  co 

cu  ^  - 

-^  03  03 


>>  -O  co 

fc-  g  OJ 

i2  <3  03 

■3  o 

a  —  co 

O  03 

oj  g  oj 

k  S  2. 

J  oj  c3 


M    c3     S 


B 

ja 


65 


§    B    " 

oj  -a 


03 

-  5 

03 

a 

= 
o 

5 

— 

CO 

« 

oi 

3 

s 

O 

3 

a 

t- 

Bq 

0) 

a 

03 
OJ 

B     3   -3    "K 


O 

a 

OJ 
J3 


O   "3 


a 

3}      CO 

S3 

OJ    jo 

£  J3 


03  .a 


aj  o 


*-    o    c    o  ^r- 

•  -H         f.        ~- 


—  n    m 

•S  a-2 

„Q  03 

03  —     « 

~  — -     m 


a    ° 
a  a 


Z  -3 

03     CU 


C-      +->       CO 

co     cj     o3 


'M  -3  — • 
h  -g  03 
03     jj     t, 


h     OJ    Z?    03     OJ 


3  ® 

03  o3 


"g     03  ■- 

B    l.  w 

.    M  | 

t  -  ~ 

M    cu  - 

CJ     OJ  ki 


a  . 

o  •- 

>.  S 

a  a 

<*  2 

a  °° 

co 


03 


03 


o    <u 

a  si 


— 

CJ 

03 

a 
o 

y. 


a  "" 

a  « 

S  m    • 

>>  J 

03  . 

a  <s 
o 


^  £-?    c3 

B  o     03 

»  ft-' 

?  C   to 

—      —      


2  S 

*^  OJ 

ja  in 

O  5a 

"*-  3 


-r 
co 
co 


o  S 


a    bo 

a  ■ 

co  .3 

.2  - 

=3     2   ' 
cj     3 
CO      O 

**i    co 


03  *J  3 

-  _S  fl 

o  "?,  o 

—  g  oo 

J2  Z  £ 

^  .a  .« 


flj  03  qj 

a  "oo  -^ 

o3  O 

^  a  ja 


oj   -3  ^~   — 


03 

a 


—      ..     OJ 

cu    oo  -- 

O   -3     Cv 


>  J 


3 
— 
03 


—  13   d 


a 

8£ 


3  - 

CN 


a  IS 


>>  'to 


■Jl  "5 
S5 


00 

oo 


3 

o 


SS 


OJ      03      CJ 

2  I   S. 


-23 
ea  a  -s 

fc.  03 

OJ  T3  J3 

•^  a  a 

o3     co     ^ 

O,    ^ 


-a   s 

03     3 

a  &q 

03 

O 


Ba  2 

3     o   — 


3 
OJ     OJ 

cj)  .a 


03     * 


"3 
OJ 

s  —  «i 

OJ  t-  -*^ 

■3  2  — 

-h  O  (D 
OJ 


OJ 


M  00 

2    >> 


-rt  5  ~ 

03    co  ja 
B    3   ^ 

-s"  ° 

OQ     CO     i*_. 

"IS 

a    -  co 

oo  CO  oj 
>  T; 
O 


a 
o 


cu 


OJ      oj 


3     03     03   rT 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


89 


00 

co 


.  c 

■o  2. 

33  03 

2  > 


cj 


a  -° 

—  -o 

so  9 

E  s 

-  r: 

-  — 


T3 

C 


oo  i 
cn 

4  °° 

m  . 

»!= 

Is  = 

o  ^ 

2  3 

??  •< 


r.  "3 

•   c 
a    a 


•3 

L- 

03 
H 

o 

"3 
3) 

-3 
u 

■3 
« 


>  t. 

o  ^ 


r 
- 
3 

Q) 

i     -     — 
OJ   <N     -. 

j3    ^    > 

00         K   '«» 

•  —      —     -fc» 


*>  a 


2  o 


£   =  -o  s 


I- 


2J 

-    m 
op 

•=■2 
5   8 

03      <J 


CO 

m 

n 

*   S 

u    o 

z  >, 

o    °> 
»    S 


_3  —         <u 

x     O 


*  IS 


a  -S 


-  - 

-  7 

3  ~ 

=  3 


"3    .3 
0J     ? 


.-     3 
4)      t. 


a  a 

"   "3 

to  3 

3     03 


O       05 

■•->     3 

o  •  ~ 


o    = 


^  z 


O^-O 


.5   «    5    - 


ft   c    & 


_>>    ig  TjS 


CO 

'«     oJ   "c3     3 


33   ~ 

p  K 


o    » 


«  M  a 

2  e  £ 

#  3  O 

CO  cp  0Q 


is 

OJ      ~ 

"fi    § 

ft3 

0J       99 

5  ■ 

♦^     oj 

O     3 

00    = 

03     S 


"3 

S      &> 

—  a 

03 

o    x 

3     03 


0J 
SO 


—    —   JH    —    '  = 


.a  » 

^    c 


03     p.    s-. 


J3    -S 
^     ■    I 

"■a  1 

>,    S3     o 


03    J?    ~   —    1- 


■5  ° 

Qi    t- 

O 
^3    T3 

1      03 

3 
O 


3  **  M 

5  d  — 

a  .2  ■- 

o   S  N 


03 
=  = 
■a    * 


0Q  "3 

O  03 

—  a) 

t»l  — 

i  "B  T3 

-     n  » 

3   -"  fcc 

"2  -b  ^2 

™   «a  -t= 

•2  ■=  '5  ^ 

=1  -  . 

.5   2  Z 

u  2  *"  '-' 

5"  SF  -  "3 

oT  3  i    > 

oc     O  ^     0J 

^    >  6X   Z 


-     -1 


«  — . 

OS 

s  .a 

O     03 
03 


'  < 


h4 

h4 


O  OJ 
-  3 
OJ   33 


—    5       03    ^ 


t:  3 

OJ      t~, 


1      03 

oj  ii, 


o     00 

-  ^i 
'S.  "3 

*-"     cj 

92 

3    N 

O      I 
*>-    "* 


O  T3 

—  3 

*^  03 
03 

s  -^ 


■3  s 

OJ     u 

ft  a  ^ 
oj  .  5 
00    >»  03 

o 


OJ      w 

-  i 


O     OJ 


*    2 
-2  .5 


T3^ 


J  2 

CD  %> 

oj  &q 
Z 


0    &  d 

1-    "    3 

J.   ~     - 
333 

-    ?  o 


•S   a   S 

73  .2  -S 


O      OJ 


O"     K 


^      m      O      ^      OJ 


"3 33 

c  x :    m 

0  3  m 

g  -  o5 

«  >. 

t.     T 

—  03     Tl 

4>  "3      .. 

O  =      § 

«  S   £ 

•3  "3     X 

■  3     O 


03     OJ    .2 


•  0J 


00 


o    " 

■gzs 

CD 

o  J 

Q 


0J 


00 

g        w 
B  -2    C 

o  £  2 
e  —  sa 


5   "3 

2  5 


.2  ;2 
-^  ^ 

03      - 

C     03 


o 

CM 

n 

I  s  ? 

■<=  3  O 

—  o  — ' 

3  X  ■„ 

=5  5 

§     d     2 

Q0      C3      *5 


T.      « 


3.    ~      OJ 
-    .« 


CJ    -53 

3 


-  ^       -^       *3 


^03 

oj  a  •» 

tT  _2    ^ 

03  "3    co 

"^  .-.      cy 

"  i5    e 

"3  t.    3 

—  2  ^ 

"  S 

3  3 


•03      " 
h     3 


O     3 
-     OJ 


^  0J 

o  — 

£  03 

0J  O 


_   o 

33    -^ 


3  00 

O   i*    3 
>>    03    -3 


"S -I 

B   §  o 

5  ~  Z 

IT 

03 

M     t.     3 

=  a  5r 


63    *C    n 

n  =  r 


o    o 

-  « 

..    03 


3  •- 

q  ^2 

0Q  *3 

03  o3 


tJ  OJ 

S  ft 

C.  3 

3  - 

«  s 


03     O      — 


^.-    >•    _ 

>»     OJ    O 


O 
cn 
ci 

"2   i 

03  CJ 

—  O 

-3  pQ 

!h  *       °3 

03  .5  "o 

S  a 


co 
*>   o 

3   "3 
03     .. 


—     u 


O     8 


2  S 

»  5 

OJ  = 

&  ^ 


.2  03 

00  OJ 

1  ° 

^  to 

.-  cu 

00  c 

g  ^: 


o  .§ 


00  -Z 
I 

s  — 

I  ° 

OJ  _k 

3  "o3 

..  J3 

T3  0J 

£  3 

00  3 

CD 

0J  - 


-  ~    .3 
•3    „  — 


o3    ^ 
0      03 

X  OJ 

■  —  — 

ao  03 

•».  * 

-I 

11 

03     3 

=  -3 
a  3 

0J  03 
m  03 
-  3 
O 


O     53   < 

il   Q  «« 


^     3 


>    2    w    -- 


o  s    a 

e  2- 

■^  —     r 

cj  v^    « 

•      S'  0J    •  = 

£    g  £  T 

Si   -S  -3     £ 


.f  ■? 

*C3     3 
03    "1 

I" 

I  a 

Ph 


3   i-S 

3   =   JS 

S3   S  U 


■3  x 

.-     3 

x.2 

3    k' 
o   o 

»  - 


.      C 


c3  a> 

-*^>  ao 

■"  CJ 

_,  3 


«     -  c 


2     03 

3h 


o  -3 

—      0J 


A  33 


a 
o 


fa 


90 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


c 
m 
& 
g 
&• 

A 

o 

o 


o 


K 

s 
o 

w 

§ 

p 
w 

fa 
o 

co 
K 

O 

fa 

fa 

cc 

fa 

a 

H 

O 
H 

w 


oo 

Ol 

w 

^ 
m 

1 

a 

a 

'3 

tn 

PQ 

- 

3 
o 

IB 


03 


O 

s 
o 

-a 


C3 
fa 


OS 
CO 


«    .2 
M    o3 


03      S 


ea 


O 


3 
O 
cj 
o 

e 


a 
6 
§  —  ^     as 


-  cq 


d    | 

o    s 


3    « 


j3    g 
c    <D 

Mo 
c     co 

d     ° 

O   13 


O  CD 

s  a 

+z  i— i 

a  u. 

CO  .+3 

£  .a 

n.  M 


3  ,  co 

1  *  g 

^  a>  do 

X!  C3  CO 


■—      (-. 

!"§ 
§§ 

a> 

O,  a) 
_o  s 
CD  — 

s  s 

!l 

3  ^ 

X  oj 
o3  CJ 
fli     ?3 


M 


03 

3 
O 


•*     03 
(3)      X 


03    £ 


~   o 

03  ^ 


CD     CD 


M  .S 

C  o3 

c  ■ 

I  a 

c  g 

t  c 

<3  o 

03  J3 

Oj  o3 

O  O 


03 
C3 

en 

CO  .w 

■o  gi 

i  Z  g 

-T*  -  00 

0J  ■  -o 

>  03  5 

-73  ^  O 

-  s  « 


.5    c 


03     w    *" 

bi      CO    **? 

oj  -w    o 


"3        ^     o        =3 


£  -2 


—  ft. 


o  j3 


•^    *    fe 


E   o 

?  « 

CD 


§.5 


o  ^ 

oo  3 

c  o 

co  <£ 

a;  O 

be  +- 

£  * 


03     03 
.«     ft  ^ 

ft    OJ    'E 

^    -  — 


- 


Z  ^   >,  in 


o3     o3 

a 


a)     a> 


00  ^  r- 
©Cm 

C  03  03 

-  *  B 

l-  o  — 

ai  o3 

"  s  « 

03  «  03 

~  .S  O 

13  —  O 

C  -^  C 

-  s  s 

>i  CP 

£  5  ^ 


- 

OQ 

3      p 


a> 

(3 

a 

a> 

^3 

O 

'^ 

M 

oi 

T3 

= 

C 

i 

~ 

•o 

t- 

03      N3 

ft  'S 


-  cj 

OJ     to 


03    ■ 
ft 


o  co 


-S  O     >i 


C     m 
03     S 


-i-     M 
c     o3 


„  O 


> 
03 

C  3 

.S  c 

-  03 

a « 

03  s 

— '  Xi 

s3  ^. 

03  *» 

a  -* 

O  03 

"c  .  £ 

O  t, 

£  E 


1-5 
1-5 


O     03 
03     £ 


a   oj 

O  13 

ft  •  r 


oj    o 


r—  13 

+j  a. 

u  — 

S  o 

-t--  T3 

CO 

^  & 


S  i 

O     OJ 


o>    cc 

ft  J3 
'/.     o 

°     0) 
0)   X 

QQ 
03 


o 


C  03  03  > 

O  T3  =  ' 

CO  -7-  ^  2 

S  «j  _ 

S  ft  >>  2 

S  S  «  ^ 

03  £  >h  o 


>>^S    oj 


oo 

C33 
(N 

~  5 
S  « 

a  I 

3     S 


3 


o 

ft 


03     oj 
2    -^ 

c    O 

.-     03 
ft    » 


OJ 


k^     CD 

^3   J3 

3  3 
m  O 
3   CO 

co 


03  "ri  - 
OJ    -^     03     OJ 
crj     3     CO    *h 


°  £ 

OJ  *-" 

co  13 

_  a 

V  a 

CD  CD 

H 

.2  ~ 

'-a  "S 


o  J? 

-b  "3 

-*J  03 

•t-  3 

S  o 


§1- 


-*^»       IK 

2  P 


*5     M 


o 


o 

PQ 


3     OJ 
O     > 

.;-,         OJ 

bi    o 
ft-C 


_  E 
■»/^ 

3    D 

■l-t      *^s 


■3     g 


oj      -g 

03 


a 

a 
a 


s    o 

03     3 
X    o 


O  03 

E  3 

c 

CD  o 

.2  03 

CO  b- 

^H  ft 

3  « 

3  CD 

•"  CD 


a  o 

CO    ^ 
CD 
M      . 

cl    K 

hQ 

d 


>1 

03 

M 

o 


a 

o 

M 

s 
"§    1 

03  <1) 

—  .R 


S  s 

oj    5 

S  £ 

3 

o 

CO 


o3 


ft 
ft 
3 

3 
CD 


O 

03 

H 

a 

3 

CO 

O 


03 

£ 

M 
O 

W 


■^1 

P3 
CM 

"S  "" 

0J  CD 

3  Ml 

CD  CD 

T3  3 

'S   '« 
03     to 

"3  2 

M    S 
3    ca 

2    s 

£     3 
co     <*> 


O     3 

cd  6q 


o 
ft 

S 

b.    J3 

03 
13 
C 

§    i» 


O 
3 


ft  s 
3  i: 

•  -    3 
t-<    oj 

£^ 


■e  ° 

l,     o3 

o    » 


OJ 


oo 

CM 

ft  & 

O      OJ 

co   -^ 
OJ   -o 


=  ° 

-S  3 

3  - 

M  <g 

3     c 

Ml     * 

!3   s 

03     (D 

3  H  T3 
0J    »    3 

?  "^  03 
OJ     o 

ax   g 

03  "3  "^ 
CO  g  CD 
03     ft  £1 

CO 

O 

Ph  O 


fa 
fa 


Q 
Q 


Taylor:    The  Genls  Eumeces 


91 


CN 


a 


I 


03 
OJ 

3 
O 


o    o 

r  -' 
°  s 

—  I 


be    3 
JJ    .Q 


C3  E 

"5  =3 

:.  — 

_  3 

O  ~ 

cj 

CJ  3 

a 

o  s 


oo 

oo 


<u    3 
«    a 


— 

'5 


X 

CN 


c 

PS 


—    -r 


— 
- 

a  = 


a  — 

o  - 

«-.  'J* 

cS 


CJ      *w      q; 

■  -    - 


^<  CN 

TO  rt 

M  CN 


3  C 

a  | 

—  *- 

-  =0 


-—     •  -    - 


>  — 


2   I* 

CO  JS 


■s-g 

M 

oj 


O 

o 


c 


*  K] 


03     OJ 

—  u 

-  0 


=     5? 


m 

.2  - 

cj  oj 

o  — 

ft  a 

^  *-^ 
^ ._ 

S  o 


2  ^ 

c    o 
_  -a 


£    -S 


s  Bq 


T3  C 

-  r 

c  ea 

-  1. 


2  -= 


oo        to 

co         ■fl' 


k.    bo 


/. 


o 


ft    <u 


3 
■  J2 
B 
OJ 

-  - 

J    > 

"a  '^ 

-    u 

•—  -° 
o  ^ 

ca 
Ed     ~ 

2      « 

—  * 


=  s 

o  g 

'■%  s 
o 


.2    g    -S    s     o    ~    o> 


•5  § 

—  *-• 

■a  J 

3  t- 

O  O 


*7    t£ 

C     3 


x  — 

C  '> 

bo  x 

C  4)   ^> 

a  "3  * 

T*  ^J    > 

=  -  2 

C  e3     O 

3  oj    OS 
O 


-    .. 

G    4. 


—    ■  — 
.-  —    - 

-   -    > 

3  ~  £ 
*<* 


>,    r 


-    — 

3     oc 

3    J 

C    3 

O     ec 

»"!      S 

si 

^  2 


03    •« 
OJ    •- 


3  s 
a  r3 


3   ^2- 


£6 

i  o 

93  ~ 

S  C 

Z:  5 

_  DO 

3  _, 

<  = 


M 
u 

3 


c 

03 
> 


03 

s 

O 

s 

03 

s 
< 


■5    S  C5 


00 


iJ    £ 


3 

-a   P 


Q         «  « 


3 


_  CO 

03  w 

"S  u 

c  a 

o  -§ 

'E  o 


"3 
U 


o 


■3 
-a 

3 
- 

3 


•S&J 


03 

3 
03 
o 
^3 

3 


-     S 

oj    5 

c.  S- 

1-3 


OQ 


00 


-^  t-. 


• 

— 

03 

03 

o 

a 

B 

OJ 

— 

CO 

c 

- 

= 

g1 

- 

o 

*=    X 

a  i-i 


X 


9     C     — 


O.    oi       3     n       - 
3    t-n       O   ~       S 

«     <5  CJ     HH       1-J 


oo  o 

cj  -i' 

_      ,—i  ^ 

t;        03  f3 

U  «i 

J2  - 

OS  00 


N  ^    g 

-  oj  .i; 
5  ft  « 
(*  "3  « 

OJ 

3  td 

CJ    1-H 

OQ 

c 
a 


OS 

c 

01 

<n 
O 

ft 


3 
c3 


^  = 


EG  r-4 


C 


o 

ft 


in 

CN 


E  oj 


ro    3 
.  o 

SB 


o  s 

oc  [5 

CN 


g         _ej 


2       E 


o 

ft 

o? 

OQ      C 

_i    - 

"       00 
O    I— I 


OQ 


7. 


OJ  0J 

I,  p-1 

^  -a 

3  3 

tl  03 


o3 

ft 


03 
3 

T3    -3 

So 

«     3 

I  g 


2    oq  .  CC 


OJ 


03 

—  ft  -=' 

OS  ft  o3  sa 

2  ^  cj  ^ 

03  1^     oo 
C 

I  O 

ftl 


o 


fe 

fe 


92 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


o 

■-D 


to 
CM. 


m 

cn 


CO 

to 


OS 
(N. 


o 

z 

o 
O 


< 

5 


s 
p 
w 

fa 
o 


P-, 
X 

a 
w 

Eh 

o 

H 

>H 

w 


3 
61 


J3 
OX 


B 

o 

J3 

H 


^n   go 

c3  "3 

c   a  ! 
.2  — 

'co      QQ 

C3   i-H 

8  2 

3£ 

3.2 

S  « 

—   a 
o   g 


O  as 

O)  CJ 

■n  a3 

O  !* 
nw 

s  . 

O  rQ 


CO 


CO 


ca    -- 

"I* 
03     C^ 

O 

QQ 

A  o 

3     >- 
L.      CJ 

"~        OQ 

•a   •  - 
J  8 


_o 

X 


73 


X 
X 


03 

a 


a   a 


- 
os 


2  s 

.5  m 

03  — 

M  2 


T3 


C     3 

a 

- 


3    5 
3    *~ 

-  ^ 

S   3 

:~^ 
03 

is 

03 

a 

o 


■8  * 

g  * 

2  g 

03  « 

-9  t- 

S  o 


03 

■3 


oj  J3 


- 

CO 

o 

12 

is 
O 

S 

3D 

01 

CC 

.ft 

03 

o 
u 

— 

l< 

o 

0J 

• 

00 

03 

N 

OJ 

to 

CN 

CO 

N 

IN 

GQ 

H 

'cO 

B 

.5 

- 

a 

03 

E 

03 

co 

OJ 

QQ 

OJ 

2 

— 

s 

"o3 

"o3 

- 

c 

IT 

03 

ej 
02 

« 

0J 

7 

"ol 

s 

03 

hi 

1-3 

1 

02 

>J 

S 

o 

1-1 

M 

£ 

c 
s 

S 

ox 


e    3        h 


—         ^ 


o    S 

CJ     3 
oj 


-a  "=■ 

OJ     2 


oj     gu 

-»       QQ 


0 
a 

r3 
03 

.  „ 

— 

•0 

0 

a 

o3 

— 

03 

OJ 

u 

J3 

*J 

a 

OJ 

OJ 

03 

0 

C 

— - 

53   "3 


L-  OJ 

o3  » 

"3  >> 

6X  1; 

C  -o 

.3  -c 

I-  > 


03  £1 

3  — 

&  03 

S  3" 


«  * 

T3  ? 

C  u 

o  OJ 

Oj  o3 

CO  CJ 

u  VI 

OJ 

ft  ~ 


ft 
o 
O 


c 
= 

a 


3 
-3 

3 

X 


OJ 

Eh 


C3  -OS  O      C 

SI 


o        S 
ft        ^ 


OJ 

-0 


O     03 
03 


t» 


s  -2 
o   3 


v     ^    19 


a        J 


3 
0 

3 

J2 

02 

ft 

' 

03 

t-t 

OJ 

si 

> 

0 

0 

ft 

b< 

ft 

0 

_oj 

„ 

La 

ja 

OJ 

CJ 

> 

3 

O 

O 

■*a 

j>> 

O 

■3 

-t^> 

03 

0 

u 

"3 

J3 

GO 

OJ 

JO 

OX 

B 

u 

0) 

GO 

-0 

.ft 

OJ 

a 

ox 


S  £ 


~  o 

GO  oj 

"^  s 

-3  <" 

3  B 

03  t. 

tj  oj 

I  3 

02  OJ 


02 

W 


o 

o 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  93 


TAXONOMIC  CONSIDERATIONS 


SCHWARTZEI  GROUP 

This  group  may  be  characterized  as  follows:  The  division  be- 
tween auricular  scales  and  the  lateral  neck  scales  prominent,  di- 
rected backwards;  line  separating  neck  and  suprabrachial  scales 
is  anterior  to  arm  insertion;  postgenial  scales  posterior  to  third 
chinshield,  bordering  labials,  not  well  differentiated;  three  pre- 
suboculars,  separated  from  postsuboculars ;  upper  eyelid  reduced, 
the  superciliary  and  palpebral  scales  in  contact;  lower  eyelid  with 
three  rows  of  scales. 

Terminal  pair  of  lamellae  tightly  drawn  about  base  of  claw?;  a 
few  small  tubercular  axillary  scales;  median  preanal  scales  overlap 
lateral  preanals;  scales  preceding  preanals  more  or  less  modified; 
enlarged  heel  pads;  no  small  tubercular  scales  behind  insertion  of 
the  hind  leg.  Scales  in  axillary  region  and  behind  the  hind  limb,  on 
>ides  of  tail,  also  on  the  posterior  side  of  arm  and  hind  limb  and  the 
region  behind  ear.  very  strongly  pitted  with  tiny  elongate  pits  or 
grooves  on  the  extreme  posterior  edges  of  scales;  pitting  only  dimly 
visible  elsewhere,  save  in  postauricular  region;  four  or  five  pairs 
of  nuchals,  followed  by  several  paired  scales  which  in  turn  are  fol- 
lowed by  greatly  widened  median  plates  on  back.  The  third 
supraocular  is  widely  separated  from  the  frontal,  the  frontopari- 
etal touching  second  supraocular;  ear  lobules  prominent,  distinct, 
rounded,  all  strongly  in  contact.  Three  anterior  superciliaries 
widened  and  elongate,  diagonally  placed.  Broadened  subcaudals 
preceded  by  four  paired  scales.  Regenerated  tail  has  greatly 
widened  scales  above  as  well  as  below,  separated  from  each  other 
by  five,  two  or  one  row  of  lateral  scales,  depending  upon  the  point 
where  regeneration  is  begun. 

Three  species,  all  large  (120mm.  snout  to  vent),  are  considered 
as  belonging  to  this  group,  which  is  confined  to  the  southern  part 
of  Mexico  and  the  northern  part  of  Central  America.  I  am  con- 
siderably in  doubt  about  their  closest  relationship.  They  resemble 
taeniolatus  of  India  and  western  Asia,  in  the  broadened  median 
series  of  dorsal  x-ales  and  general  plan  of  markings,  but  they  differ 
from  it  in  numerous  other  characters  of  equal  import,  so  that  it  is 
not  impossible  that  the  two  groups  arrived  at  this  character  in- 
dependently. 


94  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Key  to  the  Species  of  the  Schwartzei  Group 

PAGE 

A.  Limbs  widely  separated  when  adpressed.  General  color  above  light  brownish  with 
eight  dark,  narrow  dotted  lines  on  back.  Scales  in  17  rows  about  body ;  67-69  scales 
in  a  row  from  parietals  to  above  anus Eumeces  managuae  Dunn,   104 

AA.    Limbs  more  elongate,  touching  or  barely  failing  to  meet  when  adpressed. 

B.  Color  olive-bistre,  lighter  anteriorly;  three  broad,  dark  stripes,  a  median  and  two 
lateral,  beginning  on  rostral,  continue  on  back  and  sides  where  they  break  up 
into  series  of  quadrangular  spots;  a  light  line  on  side  of  head.     Scale  rows  21. 

Scales  occiput  to  above  anus,  62-33 Eumeces  schwartzei  Fischer,      94 

BB.  Light  yellow  brown,  lacking  broad  stripes  anteriorly;  occipital  and  nuchal  region 
without  markings:  scales,  with  small  dark  dots,  in  19  rows.  Scales  occiput  to 
above  anus  59 Eumeces  altamirani  Duges,   102 

Eumeces  schwartzei  Fischer 

(Plate  1;   Figs.  5,  6) 

SYNONYMY 

1884.  Eumeces  sclnvartzei  Fischer.  Abh.  Nat.  Ver.  Hamburg,  VIII,  1884,  p.  3,  p!.  VII,  fig.  1 
(type  description;  type  locality,  Island  in  Laguna  de  Terminos,  Bay  of  Campeche 
[Mexico]);  Giinther,  Biol.  Cent.  Amer.,  1885,  Oct.,  p.  33  (spelled  schwartzii;  refer- 
ence to  type  description);  Boulenger,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  382  (data 
from  type  description;  spelled  schwartzii);  Cope,  Proc.  Amer.  Philos.  Soc,  XXII,  Jan. 
to  Oct.,  1885,  p.  170  (key  characters;  spelled  schwarzei) ;  Cope,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus. 
No.  32,  1887,  p.  46;  Boulenger,  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1894,  p.  725  (lists  a  speci- 
men from  the  West  Indies  from  Christiania  Museum;  spelled  schwartzii);  Shattuck, 
the  Peninsula  of  Yucatan,  Carnegie,  1933,  App.  A,  p.  575  (spelled  schwartzii);  Stuart, 
Occ.  Papers,  Mus.  Zool.,  Univ.  Mich.,  No.  292,  June  29,  1934,  pp.  13,  14. 

History.  The  type  specimen  from  "einer  kleinen  Insel  in  der 
Laguna  de  Terminos  (Campeche  Bai)  "  reached  Hamburg,  Germany, 
apparently  as  a  stowaway  in  a  cargo  of  dyewood.  When  captured 
it  was  sent  to  the  Zoological  Garden  in  Hamburg,  and  later,  at  its 
death,  to  the  Naturhistorische  Museum.  When  described  by  Fisher 
(1884),  it  was  named  in  honor  of  E.  W.  E.  Schwartze,  an  officer  of 
the  Zoologische  Gesellschaft  in  Hamburg. 

The  type  description  is  a  good  one  and  is  accompanied  by  a 
figure  in  black  and  white  showing  scale  characters  and  markings, 
together  with  some  smaller  line  figures.  As  regards  scale  propor- 
tions and  finer  details  these  are  inaccurate. 

The  species  has  remained  a  great  rarity  in  collections.  A  single 
specimen  in  the  British  Museum  is  labeled  "West  Indies,"  doubt- 
lessly an  incorrect  locality.  A  single  specimen  is  in  the  University 
of  Michigan  collection  (Nio.  68226,  Chichen-Itza,  Yucatan,  Mex.), 
three  in  the  U.S.N.M.  (Nos.  71380,  71409  and  71948),  all  from 
Guatemala,  and  two  in  Harvard  from  Yucatan  and  Guatemala  have 
been  available  for  study. 

Duges'  species  Eumeces  altamirani,  described  in  1891  from  "las 
regiones  calidas  del  Estado  de  Michoacan,"  seems  to  be  a  close 
relative  of  Eumeces  schivartzei,  while  the  recently  described  man- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  95 

aguae  Dunn  is  more  distantly  related.  Duges,  at  the  time  he 
described  his  species,  was  unaware  of  the  description  of  this  species 
by  Fischer,  as  was  Dunn  unaware  of  the  Duges  species  when  he 
described  managuae.  Duges  figures  are  notoriously  poor  in  detail, 
and  the  true  relationships  are  hard  to  determine.  My  examination 
of  the  type  of  altamirani,  while  not  wholly  satisfactory,  causes  me 
to  retain  it  as  a  distinct  species. 

Diagnosis.  Eumcccs  schwartzei  is  a  large  species  of  the  genus, 
characterized  by  the  presence  of  a  postnasal,  a  single  post  mental, 
two  supraoculars  touching  the  frontal,  four  or  five  pairs  of  very 
broad  nuchals,  followed  by  about  ten  pairs  of  scales  somewhat 
narrower  than  the  nuchals,  which  in  turn  are  followed  by  a  broad- 
ened median  series  of  scutes  about  five  times  as  broad  as  deep. 
A  broad,  median,  dark  stripe  beginning  on  snout  is  lost  on  the  back; 
a  broad  lateral  dark  band  from  snout  to  hind  leg;  this  is  not  of 
solid  color  posteriorly,  but  breaks  tip  into  rows  of  quadrangular 
spots;  beginning  on  the  tip  of  the  snout,  a  lighter  line  of  ground 
color  follows  the  canthus,  the  supraocular  region  and  along  the  side 
of  the  back  where  it  becomes  widened  and  lost;  toes  and  fingers 
with  four  complete  series  of  scales  throughout  their  length. 

Description  of  species.  [Drawn  from  three  specimens  from  the 
United  States  National  Museum:  71380  Chuntuqui,  Peten,  Guate- 
mala; 71409  and  71948,  Remate,  Peten,  Guatemala.]  Rostral  wider 
than  high,  the  part  visible  above  relatively  small,  more  or  less 
rounded  behind,  not  forming  a  median  angle;  supranasals  large, 
forming  a  broad  median  suture,  laterally  in  contact  with  the  nasal 
and  postnasal,  the  posterior  suture  with  the  first  loreal  greater 
than  that  with  the  frontonasal.  Frontonasal  large,  longer  than  its 
distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  touching  laterally  the  first 
loreal  and  the  prefrontal,  narrowdy  touching  the  frontal  posteriorly ; 
prefrontals  more  or  less  quadrangular,  forming  subequal  suttires 
with  the  two  loreals,  the  first  superciliary  and  the  first  supraocular, 
narrowly  separated  from  each  other;  frontal  about  once  and  three 
fourths  as  long  as  broad,  not  forming  sharp  angles  at  either  end, 
touching  laterally  the  two  anterior  supraoculars ;  between  the  frontal 
and  supraoculars  is  a  very  distinct  groove  which  continues  back 
onto  the  frontoparietals;  frontoparietals  small,  forming  a  broad 
median  suture,  touching  laterally  three  supraoculars;  interparietal 
scarcely  larger  than  a  frontoparietal  but  usually  more  elongated 
(enclosed  by  parietals  in  U.S.N.M.  No.  71948  and  separated  very 
narrowly  in  U.S.N.M.  No.  71380) ;  parietals  diagonally  placed,  four- 


96 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


sided,  the  ends  of  equal  width,  the  inner  side  very  much  longer  than 
outer. 

Nostril  directly  above  the  labio-rostral  suture,  pierced  between 
the  two  parts  of  the  nasal  scale;  the  posterior  part  narrow,  form- 
ing the  very  narrow  rim  and  floor  of  the  nostril,  the  anterior  moiety 
about  one  third  the  size  of  the  postnasal;  postnasal  relatively  large, 
sometimes  approaching  the  size  of  the  combined  area  (including 
nostril)  of  the  two  nasals,  usually  extending  as  high  and  its  lowest 
point  inserted  slightly  between  upper  edges  of  the  first  two  labials, 
broadly  in  contact  with  the  supranasal;  anterior  loreal  very  high, 


6 

Fig.  5.  Eumeces  schwartzei  Fischer.  Mich.  U.  No.  68226.  Chichen- 
Itza,  Yucatan.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  17.6  mm.;  width,  16  mm. 

extending  nearly  half  its  height  beyond  the  posterior  loreal;  the 
latter  is  longer  than  high,  the  elevation  anteriorly  greater  than 
posteriorly;  three  well-defined  subequal  anterior  suboculars  follow 
the  second  loreal;  four  supraoculars;  eight  superciliaries;  four 
posterior  suboculars;  four  or  five  semitransparent  enlarged  scales 
on  lower  eyelid,  separated  from  subocular  by  three  or  four  rows  of 
small  scales ;  upper  palpebral  series  forming  sutures  its  entire  length 
with  the  superciliaries;  9  upper  and  11  lower  palpebrals;  preocular 
small,  lanceolate,  separating  the  first  presubocular  from  the  first 
superciliary,  and  followed  by  two  small  scales;  eight  upper  labials, 
the  last  very  much  the  largest,  the  fifth  smallest;  eighth  separated 
from  the  ear  lobules  by  three  or  four  pairs  of  postlabials,  the 
anterior  largest;  primary  temporal  moderate,  rectangular;  upper 
secondary  narrow,  elongate;  lower  secondary  very  large,  triangular, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  97 

touching  primary;  tertiary  temporal  separated  from  upper  secondary 
by  a  scale,  and  from  the  ear  lobules  by  two  or  three  small  post- 
labials. 

Mental  followed  by  a  single,  unpaired  postmental;  six  enlarged 
lower  labials,  the  first  two  touching  the  postmental;  three  pairs  of 
enlarged  chinshields,  the  first  pair  in  contact,  the  second  pair  sepa- 
rated by  a  single  scale,  the  third  pair  by  three  scales;  no  well- 
defined  postgenial,  the  scales  following  third  chinshicld  scarcely 
distinguishable  from  body  scales  in  two  specimens;  in  a  third  there 
is  an  elongate,  narrow  scale  following,  which  reaches  to  near  angle 
of  the  mouth. 

The  number  of  scale  rows  varies  on  the  neck  just  posterior  to  the 
ear,  from  33  to  36;  shortly  in  front  of  the  foreleg  the  count  reaches 
as  low  as  26;  the  count  about  abdomen  is  21.     The  dorsal  series 
following  the  parietals  consists  of  a  series  of  four  to  five  greatly 
widened  nuchals,  six  or  seven  times  as  wide  as  deep,  the  anterior 
usually  not  as  wide  as  but  deeper  than  the  succeeding  scales;  these 
are  followed  by  ten  or  eleven  pairs  of  scales  about  four  times  as 
wide  as  deep,  which  continue  to  a  point  on  a  level  with  the  insertion 
of  limbs;  from  here  the  dorsal  surface  is  covered  by  a  single  median 
series  of  broadened  scales  four  to  five  times  as  wide  as  deep,  which 
continue  to  a  point  as  far  back  as  the  groin.     Total  count  from 
occiput  to  above  anus  is  60-63;  scales  on  tail  not  differentiated  save 
on  underside  where  they  are  distinctly  widened,  their  posterior  edges 
strongly  curved;  the  widened  series  separated  from  vent  by  five 
paired  scales;  11  scales  about  base  of  tail  at  beginning  of  widened 
series;  lateral  body  scales  vertically  elongate,  larger  than  ventral 
scales;   rows   of  scales   following  the   insertion   of   forearm  small, 
forming  somewhat  diagonal  rows  for  a  short  distance,  but  on  sides 
they  form  series  distinctly  parallel  to  dorsal  scales.     Scales  in  the 
postauricular  region  very  small,  the  number  around  ear  opening 
21-23;  three  auricular  lobules,  directed  back;  the  scale  following 
the  eighth  upper  labial  is  somewhat  enlarged,  with  a  superimposed 
scale,  the  two  separated  from  ear  by  a  second  pair;  14  scales  about 
the  arm  near  insertion  and  about  20  scales  around  hind  limb  just 
above  point  of  insertion;  six  scales  bordering  anal  flap,  the  two 
median  only  moderately  enlarged  and  overlapping  outer;  no  dif- 
ferentiated lateral  postanal  scute  at  corners  of  vent  in  either  sex; 
a  strongly  defined,  large,  padlike  wrist  tubercle;  the  palm  has  about 
13  enlarged  scales  with  numerous  intercalated  smaller  ones;  the 
lamellar  formula  of  fingers:  6;  10;  12;  11;  9;  the  heel  is  bordered 

7—1123 


98  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

by  five  scales,  the  two  median  largest,  the  inner  more  than  twice 
as  large  as  outer;  these  preceded  by  about  10  enlarged,  rounded 
scales  intermingled  with  smaller  ones;  the  lamellar  formula  of  toes: 
7;  11;  14;  16;  11;  lamellae  smooth;  toes  encased  by  four  longitudinal 
rows  of  scales,  the  terminal  ones  bound  about  claws.  Scales  elabo- 
rately pitted,  each  lateral  and  dorsal  scale  with  numerous  elongated 
pits  near  the  posterior  border. 

Body  rather  heavy,  elongate,  with  the  limbs  strong,  well  devel- 
oped; the  adpre^sed  limbs  of  adults  not  or  but  scarcely  meeting  on 
the  sides  of  the  body;  the  average  width  of  the  body  contained 
about  five  and  one  half  times  in  snout  to  vent  measurement.  Head 
moderately  slender,  not  conspicuously  widened  in  males,  the  eye 
relatively  small,  its  greatest  diameter  contained  about  two  and  one 
half  times  in  its  distance  from  the  tip  of  the  snout. 

Color  and  markings.  Above,  the  general  ground  color  is  a  varie- 
gated olive-bistre,  slightly  clearer  anteriorly  and  probably  ap- 
proaching cream  in  life;  a  broad,  dark  brown  to  blackish  stripe, 
pointed  anteriorly,  begins  at  the  rostral,  widens,  and  continues 
back  to  the  shoulder  or  farther,  then  narrowing,  becomes  broken 
up  into  one  or  two  series  of  disconnected  quadrangular  spots; 
rostral  light;  two  light  lines  have  their  origin  here  and  continue 
back  along  canthi,  above  eyes,  and  along  the  sides  of  the  back 
where  they  are  lost  in  the  general  color  of  the  back;  after  the 
shoulder  is  past  they  develop  regular  black  spots  on  alternate 
scales.  A  dark  lateral  band  begins  at  nostril,  passes  back  involving 
eye  and  upper  part  of  labials,  and  the  upper  part  of  auricular 
opening;  it  then  passes  along  the  side  of  the  body,  where  it  gradually 
breaks  into  series  of  dark  and  lighter  spots,  forming  five  discon- 
tinuous lines;  a  few  lighter  flecks  appear  anteriorly  on  the  dark 
band  and  lighter  flecks  are  prominent  on  the  sides;  posterior  dorsal 
part  of  body  and  tail  (unregenerated  parts)  marked  more  or  less 
regularly  with  quadrangular  dark  spots;  chin,  throat,  belly,  under- 
side of  tail  and  underside  of  limbs  uniform  greenish  or  dirty 
cream;  narrow  longitudinal  dark  stripes  on  limbs;  sides  of  neck 
and  lower  labials  with  dark  vermiculations;  lower  part  of  upper 
labials  immaculate,  appearing  as  a  white  line. 

Variation.  The  type  has  not  been  available  for  study.  It  is 
obvious  that  the  type  is  a  much  smaller,  probably  much  younger, 
specimen  than  those  which  I  have  examined.  The  most  significant 
difference  in  the  type  and  the  specimens  studied  is  the  very  much 
narrower  head,  it  being  less  than  half  the  length  (possibly  an  error 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


99 


Measurements  of  Eumeces  schwartzei  Fischer 


Museum . 

Number. 
Sex 


Snout  to  vent 

Tail 

Snout  to  foreleg.  .  . 

Snout  to  ear 

Snout  to  eye 

Width  of  head 

Length  of  head. 

Width  of  body 

Postanal  tail  width  . 
Axilla  to  groin. 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Longest  toe 


llainb. 

type 


78 
128 


15 


6 
14 


19 
27 


Mich. 
68226 

d1 


112 

127* 
36 
20 
8 
18 
18 
22 
15 
64 

26.5 
37 
12.5 


I    S  VM 
71948 


M.C.Z. 
29238 


113 

127* 
37 
20 
8.5 
16.5 
17 
24 
15 
65 
28 
40 
12 


L13 


35 
19.5 

9 
15 
IS 


13 
65 
24 
37 
12.5 


U.S.N.M. 

7  1 409 

9 


118 

78* 
39 
20 
8 
16 
19 
24 
14 
68 


U.S.X.M. 

71380 

d" 


120 

133* 
42 
23 
11 
19 
19 
24 
15 
67 
28 
39 
13 


M.C.Z. 

24504 

? 


120 


35 

20.2 
9 
16 

18 


16 
68 
27 
39 
13 


*  Regenerated  partly. 
Type,  from  Laguna  de  Terminos,  Campeche;   68226,  29238,  Chichen-Itza,  Yucatan;   71948, 
71409,  713S0,   25404,  Peten,  Guatemala. 

in  measurement).  The  limbs  overlap  when  adpressed.  That  the 
limbs  overlap  in  the  small,  younger  specimens  is  the  normal  ex- 
pectancy in  this  genus,  even  though  they  are  separated  in  the  adults. 

A  specimen  in  the  Michigan  University  Museum,  No.  68226, 
agrees  in  practically  all  essential  scale  characters.  The  regenerated 
tail  shows  two  stages  of  regeneration;  the  older  proximal  part  has 
the  scales  very  irregular  in  size  and  shape,  while  the  distal  (more 
recent)  part,  50  mm.  in  length,  has  throughout  the  greater  part  of 
its  length  only  a  single  dorsal  and  a  single  ventral  series,  which  meet 
laterally.  The  first  pair  of  chinshields  is  separated  by  a  single 
scale.  The  color  agrees  save  that  the  shade  varies;  thus  the  areas 
between  the  black  stripes  on  the  head  are  almost  a  dove  gray,  but 
fade  to  the  leaden  gray  of  the  back;  the  limbs  are  brownish  gray, 
the  scales  with  darker  spots  forming  lines,  eight  on  forelimb, 
eighteen  on  the  posterior. 

The  following  additional  variation  is  noted  in  the  six  specimens 
studied:  two  have  the  parietals  very  slightly  separated,  the  others 
have  them  in  contact.  The  number  of  scales  from  occiput  to  above 
vent  are  from  60  to  63,  the  first  number  occurring  five  times;  the 
upper  labials  are  invariably  eight.  Nuchals  and  the  scales  between 
the  nuchals  and  the  beginning  of  the  large  median  series  are:    one, 


100  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

4-5  nuchals,  12-11  smaller  body  scales;  one,  4-5  nuchals,  10-10 
smaller;  one,  5-5  nuchals,  11-11  smaller;  two,  5-5  nuchals,  12-12 
smaller;  one,  5-4  nuchals,  12-13  smaller  scales.  No  variation  was 
noted  in  the  supraoculars  save  that  two  were  partly  fused  in  one 
specimen.  The  postmentals,  loreals  and  labials  preceding  the  sub- 
ocular  are  constant.  The  frontonasal  is  broader  than  long  in  two 
specimens,  the  length  and  width  equal  in  four;  the  frontonasal 
touches  frontal  in  all  specimens;  two  supraoculars  are  in  contact 
with  the  frontal  in  all  specimens.  All  have  three  presuboculars, 
and  four  or  three  postsuboculars.  The  limbs  fail  to  touch  in  all, 
by  a  distance  of  from  5  mm.  to  10  mm. 

The  scale  rows  about  the  body  show  the  following  variation:  On 
neck  behind  ear,  32  to  39 ;  on  narrow  part  of  neck,  26  to  29 ;  behind 
arm,  29  to  31;  around  the  middle  of  the  body,  19  to  21  (19  occurring 
only  in  one  Guatemalan  specimen)  ;  15  to  16  about  base  of  the  tail. 
The  scales  surrounding  the  ear  vary  from  21  to  24,  21  in  two  speci- 
mens, 22  or  23  in  two,  and  24  in  two.  The  superciliaries  are  8-8 
save  in  one  specimen,  which  has  10-8.  Ear  lobules  are  three  or  four. 
The  subdigital  lamellae  of  fourth  toe  vary  from  15  to  17,  16  being 
the  most  frequent  number. 

The  pitting  on  the  posterior  edge  of  the  scales  is  very  prominent 
on  posterior  side  of  foreleg;  on  the  side,  above  and  behind  the  fore- 
leg; on  the  posterior  side  of  hind  leg  and  on  tail  behind  the  hind 
leg;  also  in  the  postauricular  region.  The  pitting  is  but  dimly  evi- 
dent on  neck  and  sides  of  body.  There  is  a  faint  suggestion  of 
striations  on  dorsal  scales,  the  striae  being  located  above  the  main 
canals  of  the  scales  which  are  visible  in  some  of  the  specimens. 

The  description  of  the  coloration  of  the  younger  type  specimen 
given  by  Fischer  states  that  the  light  lines  beginning  on  the  rostral 
are  yellow  anteriorly,  becoming  more  rose  posteriorly,  giving  a  rosy 
tone  to  the  last  two  thirds  of  the  back.  The  broad,  dark  lateral 
streak  on  the  sides  of  the  body  is  mixed  with  yellow  and  rosy  light 
spots.  The  markings  agree  in  most  details  with  those  previously 
given. 

Remarks.  The  species  apparently  is  most  closely  related  to 
altamirani.  These  forms,  together  with  managuae,  constitute  a 
clearly  defined  group  whose  relationships  are  with  western  Asiatic, 
rather  than  with  any  other  group  on  the  American  continent.  (See 
discussion  under  the  Taeniolatus  group.)  Fischer  (1884)  compares 
it  with  Mabuia  brevirostris    (Eumeces  brevirostris)    as  the  most 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


101 


closely  related  species  in  the  New  World.  However,  the  relation- 
ship with  this  form  is  no  closer  than  with  any  other  known  species 
outside  of  its  own  group. 

Little  is  known  of  its  habits.  Two  labels,  on  National  Museum 
specimens,  with  notes  by  Harry  Malleis,  their  collector,  which  state: 
"caught  in  a  trap"  and  caught  "in  hot  sun"  in  trap,  suggest  diurnal 
habits.  Whether  the  species  is  ovoviviparous  could  not  be  de- 
termined from  the  specimens  examined.  I  presume  that  it  is  an 
arboreal  form. 


73              ' 

J. 

?5w        1 

»r 

• 

J  u 

■  ■■'■  ^5^^'V 

l 

D      *    1 

i          \ 

09 

- 

■  oliam/fan/ 
•    sctnwar-tzei 

<s<^ 

or 

oo 

9S- 

,o 

Fig.  6.    Distribution  of  the  species  of  the  Schwartzei  group  in  Mexico 

and  Central  America 

Distribution.  The  records  available  suggest  that  schwartzei  is  a 
lowland  forest  form,  occupying  the  lowland  territory  east  and  south 
of  the  isthmus  of  Tehuantepec,  to  and  including  Guatemala. 

Locality  records. 
Campeche:    Island  in  the  Laguna  de  Terminos.     (Type  locality)    (Hamburg 

1;  type). 
Ytjcatan:    Chichen-Itza  (M.C.Z.  1  Shattuck)   (Mich.  1). 
Guatemala:     Remate,   Peten    (U.S.N. M.   2,    H.    Malleis   Coll.);    Chuntuqui, 

Peten  (TJ.S.N.M.  1,  H.  Malleis  Coll.);  Uaxactun,  Peten  (M.C.Z.  1). 


102  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Eumeces  altamirani  Duges 

(Plate  2;  Fig.  6) 
SYNONYMY 
1891.  Eumeces  altamirayii  Duges.  La  Naturaleza,  (2),  I  (18S7-1890),  1891,  pp.  485,486,  pi. 
XXII  (in  color)  with  6  figs,  (type  description;  type  locality,  "regiones  calidas  del  Es- 
tado  de  Michoacan,"  Mexico;  Altamirano  Coll.);  (Platypholis  is  suggested  as  a  generic 
name,  but  not  used);  and  idem,  (2),  II,  1894,  pp.  480  and  485  (Apatzingan) ;  Boul- 
enger,  Zool.  Record,  1893,  pp.  1-38  (notes  that  Platypholis  Duges  is  preoccupied  by 
Platypholis  Boulenger,   1890). 

History.  This  species  was  founded  on  a  single  specimen  which 
was  discovered  in  the  low  part  of  Michoacan  (regiones  calidas)  and 
forwarded  to  Alfredo  Duges  by  Dr.  Fernando  Altamirano,  then 
director  of  the  Instituto  Medico  Nacional.  Duges  published  a  good 
description  in  either  the  latter  part  of  1890  or  the  first  part  of  1891 
(probably  the  latter),  together  with  a  hand-colored  plate.  This 
figure  is  satisfactory  for  the  general  color  markings  and  the  body 
contour.    The  details  shown,  however,  are  very  untrustworthy. 

In  a  later  publication,  Duges  lists  the  form  and  gives  Apatzingan 
(Apatzingan  de  la  Constitution,  Michoacan)  as  a  locality,  pre- 
sumably referring  to  this  as  the  type  locality,  since  no  additional 
specimen  is  mentioned.  The  author  appears  to  have  been  unaware 
of  the  description  of  Eumeces  schwartzei  by  Fischer,  published  in 
1884,  and  considers  his  species  to  be  related  to  Eumeces  hallowelli 
Bocourt,  and  makes  a  comparison  of  the  form  with  Eumeces  Bo- 
courti  Boulenger. 

I  was  able  to  make  an  examination  of  the  type  specimen,  now  in 
the  Alfredo  Duges  Museum,  Guanajuato,  Guanajuato,  Mexico,  and 
concluded  that  it  represents  a  species  distinct  from,  but  most  closely 
related  to,  Eumeces  schwartzei.  It  is  more  distantly  related  to  the 
recently  described  Eumeces  managuae  Dunn. 

Diagnosis.  A  member  of  the  Schwartzei  group.  A  large  species 
lacking  typical  dorsolateral  or  lateral  light  lines;  likewise,  lacking 
a  median  line  bifurcating  on  head.  General  color  light  yellow- 
brown,  with  small  blackish  spots  on  the  scales;  no  elongate  black 
stripe  on  head  continuing  to  middle  of  the  body.  Three  or  four 
nuchals,  followed  by  12-11  widened  body  scales,  in  turn  followed 
by  45  very  broad,  median  scales,  making  a  total  of  59  from  pari- 
etals  to  above  anus;  median  preanal  scales  very  large,  their  edges 
overlapping  the  small  adjoining  scales  bordering  the  anus;  heel 
plates  not  greatly  enlarged;  parietals  inclose  the  interparietal; 
four  supraoculars.  Scales  in  19  rows;  one  postmental;  one  post- 
nasal; eight  upper  labials. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  103 

Description  of  species*  (from  the  type,  an  unnumbered  specimen 
in  the  Alfredo  Duges  Museum,  Guanajuato,  Mexico). 

Rostra]  moderate,  triangular,  wider  than  high;  supranasals  in 
contact,  forming  a  suture  slightly  more  than  half  their  length; 
frontonasal  large,  broadly  in  contact  with  frontal,  forming  sutures 
with  the  anterior  loreals,  which  are  smaller  than  those  with  supra- 
nasals or  the  prefrontals;  latter  pentagonal,  their  sutures  with  the 
frontal  only  slightly  smaller  than  those  with  the  frontonasal;  sutures 
with  the  two  loreals  nearly  equal,  as  are  those  with  the  first  super- 
ciliaries  and  first  supraoculars.  Frontal  angular  anteriorly  and 
posteriorly,  relatively  narrow,  touching  two  supraoculars;  fronto- 
parietals in  ('(intact  (their  size  cannot  be  determined  because  of  a 
wound;  the  same  is  likewise  true  of  the  interparietal);  parietals 
narrowly  in  contact  behind  the  interparietal;  latter  followed  by  a 
small  scale  narrowly  separated  from  it  by  the  union  of  the  parietals, 
and  partially  separating  the  first  pair  of  nuchals;  nuchals  wide, 
three  on  one  side,  four  on  other. 

Nasal  moderate,  followed  by  a  single  postnasal;  two  loreals; 
three  presuboculars,  four-five  postsuboculars;  primary  temporal 
forming  a  suture  with  the  lower  secondary,  separating  the  eighth 
labial  from  the  large  upper  secondary  temporal;  tertiary  temporal 
present;  eight  upper  labials;  three  superciliaries  touching  first 
supraocular;  last  of  the  series  large  (regarded  by  Duges  as  a  fifth 
supraocular) ;  postmental  single,  followed  by  three  pairs  of  chin- 
shields,  the  first  two  separated  by  a  single  scale.  Ear  opening  oval, 
with  four  lobules  on  the  anterior  border;  lower  eyelid  with  six  en- 
larged semitransparent  plates. 

Scales  in  19  rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body,  the  nuchals 
followed  by  12-11  widened  body  scales  which  are  followed  by  45 
large,  transversely  widened  scales,  making  a  total  of  59  scales  in  a 
row  from  parietals  to  above  anus;  median  preanal  scales  greatly 
enlarged,  the  outer  smaller,  the  inner  scales  overlapping  the  outer 
scales;  plates  bordering  heel  not  so  large  as  in  schwartzei;  lamellar 
formula  for  fingers:  6;  10;  12;  13;  9;  adpressed  limbs  widely  sepa- 
rated.   Character  of  scale  pits  not  discernible. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  General  color  light  yellow-brown,  with  a  few 
scattered  black  dots  on  the  head;  the  occipital  and  nuchal  region 
lighter  than  rest  of  body,  and  without  marking;  the  median  dorsal 
scales  are  of  a  darker  shade  than  those  of  neck,  each  scale  with  one 

*  In  my  examination  of  the  type  I  was  not  permitted  to  remove  the  specimen  from  its 
container;    as  a  result  much   of  the  detail  must  necessarily  be  omitted. 


104  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

or  more  small,  blackish  dots,  placed  more  or  less  irregularly,  not 
forming  lines;  along  the  sutures  of  the  median  series  an  unspotted 
line  extends  to  the  tail,  outlined  by  a  row  of  brown  dots  along  the 
middle  of  the  first  lateral  scale  row,  one  dot  on  each  scale;  a  second 
unspotted  line  follows  the  first  and  second  scale  rows  with  a  broad, 
brown  band,  darkest  on  neck,  and  is  flecked  and  reticulated  with 
lighter  color;  on  the  sides  of  the  head,  it  is  represented  by  a  series 
of  heavy  brown  dots  or  spots  on  the  edge  of  the  labials;  the  fifth 
scale  row  has  a  series  of  dark  dots  from  axilla  to  groin;  unregener- 
ated  part  of  the  tail  with  brown  dots  on  each  scale;  on  the  re- 
generated part  these  are  scattered ;  apparently  unspotted  below. 

Measurements*  of  Eurneces  altamirani  Duges 

Head  length  15  Body  width 17 

Head  width 14  Tail  (reg.)   99 

Body  length  68 

Remarks.  As  I  was  unable  to  make  a  complete  examination  of 
the  type,  much  detail  is  lacking  in  the  description.  It  differs  from 
both  schivartzei  and  managuae  by  the  very  different  color  patern, 
but  is  undoubtedly  more  closely  related  to  schivartzei. 

Distribution  and  locality  records.  Only  the  type  locality,  Apat- 
zingan,  Michoacan,  Mexico,  is  known.  (See  Fig.  6  for  distributional 
map.) 

Eurneces  managuae  Dunn 

(Plate  3  ;   Figs.  6,  7,  8) 
SYNONYMY 

1887.  Eurneces  taeniolatus  (Non  Blyth)  Boulenger.  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  383 
("India;"    Brief  description). 

1933.  Eurneces  rnanaguae  Dunn.  Proc.  Biol.  Soc.  Wash.,  46,  1933,  pp.  67,  68.  (Type  de- 
scription.    Type  locality  Managua,  Nicaragua.) 

History.  This  striking  species,  since  the  publication  of  the  third 
volume  of  Boulenger's  catalogue,  has  been  masquerading  under  the 
name  of  an  Indian  species,  Eurneces  taeniolatus.  In  this  work  a 
short  description  of  a  specimen  is  given,  but  no  locality  data  other 
than  "India,"  and  no  collector's  name  is  given. 

Owing  to  my  discovery  that  Eurylepis  taeniolatus  Blyth  and 
Plestiodon  scutatus  Theobald  were  founded  on  the  same  types,  it 
was  apparent  that  Boulenger's  specimen  belonged  to  an  unnamed 
species.  In  1932  Mr.  H.  W.  Parker,  of  the  British  Museum,  kindly 
furnished  me  with  photographs  of  this  specimen,  which  were  clear 
enough  to  permit  a  detailed  study  of  the  scales  as  well  as  the  color 

*  From  Duges. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  105 

markings.  It  was  obvious  after  an  examination  of  the  photographs, 
that  the  relationship  was  with  Eumeces  altamirani  and  Eumeces 
schwartzei,  rather  than  with  an  Indian  species,  and  that  the  species 
was  an  undescribed  form,  probably  from  Central  or  South  America. 

Apparently  no  further  specimens  reached  any  museum  until 
1932,  when  a  specimen  was  discovered  in  the  aviation  field  at 
Managua,  Nicaragua,  by  James  H.  Ivy,  and  forwarded  to  the 
United  States  National  Museum  through  Dr.  S.  S.  Cook.  It  was 
described  by  Dr.  E.  R.  Dunn,  Mar.  21,  1933.  The  type  is  now 
U.S.N.M.  No.  89474. 

Dunn  called  attention  to  the  fact  that,  "In  some  ways  each  of 
the  American  Species  [i.  e.,  Eumeces  schwartzei  and  E.  managuae] 
is  more  like  one  of  the  Indian  species  than  it  is  like  its  American 
relative."  It  is  presumed  that  he  meant  that  managuae  was  more 
like  taeniolatus  Boulenger  than  it  was  like  schwartzei;  but  he  did 
not  consider  the  possibility  that  they  were  identical.  Dunn  gives 
a  key  to  a  part  of  this  group  of  Eumeces,  based  upon  the  number 
of  nuchals,  placing  the  two  American  species  (he  does  not  consider 
Eumeces  altamirani  Duges)  in  a  group  having  14-17  pairs  of 
nuchals;  the  two  presumed  Indian  forms  in  the  group  having  4-5 
nuchals.  As  a  matter  of  fact  both  the  Indian  and  American  species 
have  practically  the  same  number  of  nuchals.  Dunn  has  mistaken 
the  widened  body  scales  following  the  nuchals  for  true  nuchals,  and 
these  are  present  in  Eumeces  taeniolatus  Blyth,  averaging  about  12 
in  number,  which  by  Dunn's  interpretation  would  give  16  nuchals, 
and  consequently  would  not  differ  in  this  character  from  the  Ameri- 
can forms. 

Diagnosis.  A  large  species,  a  member  of  the  Schwartzei  group, 
characterized  by  a  median  series  of  greatly  expanded  scutes,  ex- 
tending from  the  shoulders  to  a  point  near  the  base  of  the  tail; 
inner  preanal  scutes  overlapping  the  outer;  nostril  pierced  in  a  very 
small  nasal  directly  above  the  suture  of  the  rostral  and  first  labial; 
upper  palpebral  series  all  in  contact  with  the  superciliaries;  four 
pairs  of  expanded  nuchals;  two  tertiary  temporals,  not  strongly 
differentiated;  one  postmental;  a  postnasal;  three  presuboculars; 
two  pairs  of  postlabials;  large  auricular  lobules;  terminal  lamellae 
of  toes  bound  tightly  about  base  of  claws ;  two  greatly  enlarged  heel 
plates;  subcaudals  transversely  widened;  no  differentiated  lateral 
postanal  scute;  adpressed  limbs  widely  separated;  brown,  dark 
lined,  above. 

Description  of  type.     (U.S.N.M.  No.  89474.)     A  large  species. 


106 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


The  rostral  broad,  relatively  low,  the  part  visible  above  forming  a 
very  obtuse  angle,  and  much  less  in  area  than  the  frontonasal; 
supranasals  large,  transversely  placed,  forming  a  median  suture; 
frontonasal  much  larger  than  the  prefrontals,  rounded  anteriorly, 
laterally  in  contact  with  the  anterior  loreals;  prefrontals  generally 
pentagonal,  forming  sutures  with  the  frontonasal,  frontal,  second 
loreal,  first  supraocular,  first  loreal,  and  first  superciliary,  the 
sutures  varying  in  length  from  larger  to  smaller  in  the  order  named; 
frontal  somewhat  rounded  anteriorly,  with  a  small  pointed  tip 
posteriorly,  which  touches  the  interparietal;  frontoparietals  much 


Fig.  7.  Eumeces  managuae  Dunn.  U.S.N.M.  No.  89474;  Managua, 
Nicaragua.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  15  mm.;  width,  13  mm. 

smaller  than  the  prefrontals  (one  abnormally  fails  to  touch  the 
second  supraocular,  allowing  the  third  supraocular  to  contact  the 
frontal)  ;  interparietal  narrowing  to  a  blunt  point  behind,  in  con- 
tact with  nuchals ;  parietals  about  three  fifths  as  wide  as  long. 

Four  supraoculars  normally  (the  fourth  divided,  forming  five 
on  the  right  side)  ;  four  pairs  of  broad  nuchal  scales  (the  left 
anterior  small),  followed  by  several  widened  body  scales;  nasal 
small,  merely  a  rim  about  the  nostril,  save  for  a  minute  triangular 
moiety  at  the  upper  anterior  corner;  nostril  very  large,  pierced  in 
the  nasal  directly  above  the  suture  of  rostral  and  first  labial;  nasal 
probably  not  divided,  although  there  is  a  trace  of  a  groove  from 
nostril  to  the  supranasal  and  perhaps  another  to  the  rostral  (cer- 
tainly not  to  the  first  labial  as  is  true  of  most  American  Eumeces) . 


Taylor:    The  Genl'S  Eumeces  107 

Postnasal  nearly  as  large  as  nasal;  anterior  loreal  large,  much 
wider  at  top  than  bottom,  much  higher  than  second  Loreal;  second 
loreal  a  little  longer  than  high;  three  well-defined  presuboculars 
(a  character  shared  only  with  Eumeces  of  the  Schwartzei  group)  ; 
nine-eight  superciliaries,  the  anterior  narrow,  elongate,  as  is  the 
last,  and  of  about  same  size;  a  minute  preocular,  narrowly  in  con- 
tact with  the  loreal,  with  two  small  scales  above  and  behind  it;  two 
very  small  postoculars;  four  postsuboculars,  the  upper  large,  of 
same  size  as  the  last  superciliary;  primary  temporal  rectangular, 
broadly  in  contact  with  the  large  fan-shaped  lower  secondary;  upper 
secondary  rather  angular,  bordered  posteriorly  by  the  nuchal  but  in 
contact  with  the  upper  and  larger  of  the  two  tertiary  temporals.* 

Of  the  anterior  pair  of  postlabials  the  lower  scale  is  largest; 
these  followed  by  a  second  pair  of  which  the  upper  is  largest;  eight 
upper  labials,  five  preceding  the  subocular  (nine  on  right  side,  where 
the  third  appears  to  be  segmented);  six  lower  labials;  mental  with 
a  labial  border  slightly  greater  than  the  rostral;  postmental  rela- 
tively small,  narrow;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  only  the  anterior 
pair  in  contact;  first  postgenial  small,  bordered  internally  by  a 
larger  and  longer  scale;  upper  palpebral  scales  small,  directly  touch- 
ing superciliaries  throughout  the  greater  part  of  the  series.  Lower 
palpebrals  small,  with  a  series  of  six  or  seven  enlarged  semi- 
transparent  scales  separated  from  the  subocular  by  two  rows  of 
granules.  Line  separating  the  postauricular  series  from  the  lateral 
nuchals  forms  a  strong  diagonal.  Ear  opening  large,  with  three 
(or  two)  lobules;  about  23  scales  around  ear. 

Scales  from  parietals  to  above  the  anus,  69,  arranged  as  follows: 
four  pairs  of  nuchals,  followed  by  thirteen  pairs  of  widened  body 
scales,  which  are  in  turn  followed  by  fifty-two  much  widened 
median  scales  five  or  six  times  as  wide  as  long;  scales  around 
anterior  nuchal  region,  30;  about  constricted  portion  of  neck,  23; 
about  axillary  region,  25;  about  middle  of  body,  17  rows;  13  about 
base  of  tail;  lateral  and  ventral  scales  much  widened;  subcaudals 
greatly  widened,  five  or  six  times  as  wide  as  long;  no  well-defined 
area  of  granular  scales  back  of  insertion  of  the  forelimb  (usually  not 
more  than  two  short  rows) ;  a  few  granules  behind  insertion  of  hind 
limb;  the  intercalated  scale  series  of  the  axillae  disappear  before  a 
distance  equal  to  forearm  to  elbow  is  reached. 

Twelve  scales  about  insertion  of  forearm;  palm  with  an  outer 

*  These  scales,  while  not  occupying  the  same  position  with  regard  to  the  upper  secondary 
temporal,  appear  to  be  the  tertiary  scale  divided  in  two.  This  condition  obtains  in  certain 
Asiatic  and  African  forms. 


108 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


wrist  tubercle  moderately  well  defined,  with  four  or  five  smaller 
posterior  tubercles,  and  three  large  padlike  anterior  scales  sur- 
rounded by  smaller  granules;  fingers  with  four  rows  of  scales  to 
tip,  the  formula  for  the  ventral  lamellae  being:  7;  10;  11;  11;  9. 
The  terminal  upper  scale  is  very  small  and  is,  with  the  terminal 
lower  lamella,  tightly  bound  about  the  base  of  the  claw,  allowing 
apparently  but  little  movement  of  the  claw;  seventeen  scales  about 
insertion  of  hind  limb;  two  greatly  enlarged  triangular  scales  on 
heel  and  a  single  enlarged  scale  on  the  sole  surrounded  by  smaller, 
granular,  slightly  imbricating  scales;  lamellar  formula  for  toes:  6; 
9;  13;  14;  9.  Toes  with  four  scale  series,  the  terminal  ones  same  as 
on  fingers. 

Color  and  markings.  Above  generally  a  sepia  or  bistre,  the 
ground  color  of  sides  lighter;  the  head  dark,  due  to  numerous  angu- 
lar dark  areas.  Two  dark,  more  or  less  continuous  lines  begin  on 
parietals  and  continue  along  the  middle  of  the  back,  but  become 
obsolete  on  the  base  of  tail.  A  second,  somewhat  less  distinct,  dark 
line  begins  on  the  second  scale  row  while  similar  dark  lines  follow 
the  third  and  fourth  rows  to  tail,  that  on  the  fourth  row  being  best 
defined;  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  rows  with  less-distinct  dotted 
lines;  limbs  with  dotted  lines;  scales  of  tail  above,  each  with  a 
darker  area,  not  forming  lines.  The  ventral  surface  of  head,  body, 
and  limbs  cream  white;  subcaudal  scales  strongly  dotted  with  dark 
gray  or  blackish ;  upper  and  lower  labials  light,  each  with  a  strongly 
defined  dark  spot. 


Measurements  of  Eumeces 

managuae  Dunn 

Museum 

U.S.N.M. 

89474 

& 

British  Mus 

Number 

53,8,  17,6 

Sex 

d< 

Snout  to  vent 

117 
7.8 
17.4 
33 
65 
20 
26 
15 
13 
15 
10 

116 

Snout  to  eye 

7.2 

Snout  to  ear 

17 

Snout  to  foreleg 

32  5 

Axilla  to  groin 

66 

Foreleg 

19  7 

Hind  leg 

26  7 

Width  of  body 

15 

Width  of  head 

14  5 

Length  of  head 

14  4 

Postanal  width 

Tail 

10.2 

168* 

Tip  regenerated  and  extreme  tip  missing. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  109 

Variation.  The  specimen  from  the  British  Museum,  described 
by  Boulenger  as  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (No.  53,  8, 17,  6)  differs  for 
the  most  part  in  only  minor  details.  The  supraoculars  are  4-4. 
(Boulenger  has  mistaken  the  last  large  superciliary  for  a  fifth 
supraocular);  superciliaries  8-8;  upper  labials  7-7;  the  number  of 
scales  around  the  neck,  body,  and  tail  are  identical  with  the  type. 

Two  points  of  difference  may  be  noted,  both  of  which  are  within 
the  expected  range  of  variation.  One  is,  that  the  interparietal  is 
inclosed  by  the  parietals,  a  character  which,  if  found  constant,  might 
warrant  giving  the  specimen  a  different  designation.     (This  char- 


Fig.  8.  Eumeces  managuae  Dunn.  British  Mus.  No.  53,  8,  17,  6.  A,  lat- 
eral view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length,  14.4  mm.; 
width,  14.5  mm. 

acter,  while  usually  constant  in  Eumeces,  is  variable  also  in  Eumeces 
schwartzei.)  The  other  character  is  the  presence  of  only  five  paired 
scales  following  the  nuchals  instead  of  thirteen  pairs  as  occurs  in 
the  type.  However,  there  is  only  a  difference  of  two  scales  in  the 
total  number  from  parietals  to  above  anus. 

That  the  total  number  of  broadened  dorsal  scales  varies  and 
likewise  the  number  of  the  paired  scales  between  the  nuchals  and 
the  broadened  scales  is  shown  by  the  variation  in  both  Eumeces 
taeniolatus  Blyth  and  Eumeces  schwartzei.  In  the  former  the 
paired  scales  are  known  to  vary  from  12  to  16  (four  specimens) ;  in 
the  latter  from  10  to  13  (six  specimens) .  Larger  series  will  probably 
show  a  much  greater  variation. 

Save  for  the  fact  that  the  color  markings  of  the  British  Museum 
specimen  have  faded,  they  are  identical  with  those  of  the  type. 


110  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

An  examination  of  the  table  of  measurements  shows  that  the  two 
specimens  are  almost  exactly  the  same  size,  differing  scarcely  more 
than  one  millimeter  in  any  measurement. 

Remarks.  That  so  large  a  species  should  exist  in  Central  America 
and  remain  unknown  save  for  the  two  mentioned  specimens  suggests 
that  the  species  may  even  be  eventually  discovered  in  northern 
South  America.    Nothing  is  known  of  its  habits. 

Distribution  and  locality  records.  Only  the  type  locality  is 
known.     (See  Fig.  6  for  distributional  map.) 

TAENIOLATUS  GROUP 

Only  a  single  Asiatic  species,  tacniolatus,  is  here  included.  It  is 
characterized  by  four  or  five  pairs  of  nuchals,  followed  first  by 
paired  scales,  then  directly  by  a  much  widened  median  series  of 
scales.  A  large  postnasal  present;  two  (rarely  one)  postmentals; 
frontal  in  contact  with  the  interparietal,  which  is  not  inclosed  by 
parietals.  Limbs  small,  widely  separated  when  adpressed;  heel 
plates  not  much  enlarged;  upper  palpebral  scales  not  in  contact 
with  superciliaries;  terminal  lamellae  of  toes  not  bound  tightly 
about  base  of  claws.  Inner  preanal  scales  overlap  outer;  three 
supraoculars  touch  frontal;  two  presuboculars;  last  labial  separated 
from  ear  by  about  four  pairs  of  postlabials.  Twenty-one  scale  rows. 
As  remarked  under  the  Schwartzei  group,  I  regard  the  fusion  of 
the  median  scale  series  (incomplete  in  Schwartzei  group)  as  a 
character  possibly  independently  arrived  at  in  the  two  groups. 
The  form  has  no  close  relatives,  but  it  probably  has  more  specialized 
characters  in  common  with  the  Schneiderii  group  than  with  any  of 
the  others. 

It  is  quite  probable  that  in  the  material  here  considered  there  is 
more  than  one  species.  The  specimens  in  European  museums 
should  be  segregated  and  reviewed.  (Note  comments  of  Parker 
under  variation.)  The  specimen  here  described  differs  considerably 
from  the  characters  shown  in  a  photograph  of  the  type,  but  to  what 
extent  this  is  due  to  the  eighty  years  of  preservation  of  the  type  I 
cannot  say. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  111 

En  an  a  s  tin  niolatus  (Blyth  i 

I'  ites   i.  :> :   Figs.  9,  10) 
SYNONYMY 

1854.    Eurylepis    taeniolatus    Blyth.      Journ.    Asiat.    Soc.    Bengal,    XXIII,    1S54,    pp.    739-740 

(type  locality,  Salt    Range,  Punjab,  India.  Theobald  Coll.). 
1S66.    Plestiodon  scutatus    1  Id.     Extra  Number  Journ.   Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  No.  CXLVI, 

1866,   pp.   25-26   (type  description;    no  record  of  habitat   or  donor;    2  specimens). 

1870.  Plestiodon  (.Eumeces)  scutatus  Jerdon.  Proi  \  t.  Soc.  Bengal,  1870,  p.  73  (Alpine 
Punjab  on  route  from  Jhelum  inu>   Kashmir). 

1871.  Mabouia  taeniolata  Anderson  (part.).  Proc.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal.  1871,  p.  184  (a). pat- 
ently this  description  is  drawn  from  one  of  the  types  of  taeniolatus). 

1872.  Eumect  >latus  Stoliczka.  Proc.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  XLI,  1872,  pp.  75-76  (Urira, 
Northwestern  Each);  idem,  p.  88;  Blanford,  Journ.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  XLIV  (n.  s), 
pt.  II,  No.  3,  1875,  p.  191;  Theobald.  Desc.  Cat.  Rept.  British  India,  1876,  p.  65, 
and  addenda,  p.  X,  and  synopsis,  p.  X;  Murray,  Yert.  Zool.  Sind,  London-Bombay, 
1884,  p.  356  (Sind):  Blanford,  2d  Yarkand  Mission,  Rept.,  p.  19  (Chakoti  on  road 
from  Man  to  Srinagar  in  Kashmir);  Annandale,  Journ.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  1905  (New 
Series),  I.  No.  5,  pp.  148-150  (Salt  Range);  Hora,  Rec.  Indian  Mus.,  XXV,  1923,  pp. 
369-376  (only  types  mentioned). 

1887.  Eumeces  scutatus  Boulenger.  Cat.  I.iz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  382  (Sind,  Punjab, 
Kashmir);  Fauna  British  India.  Rept.,  1S90,  pp.  21S-219  (Cutch);  Proc.  Zool.  Soc. 
London.  Dec.  1S91,  p.  628  (Puli  Hatun  [Pul-i-Khatun],  Transcaspia) ;  Nikolsky,  Mem. 
Acad.  Imp.  Sci.  St.  Petersburg,  XVII,  No.  1,  1905,  pp.  184-185;  Mikhailovski, 
(Yearb.  Zool.  Mus.  Imp.  Acad.  Sci.  St.  Petersburg,  Russian  Text),  IX,  1904,  p.  41 
(Durun,  near  Askhabad  and  Bakharder) ;  Annandale,  Journ.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal  (new 
series),  I,  No.  5,  1905,  pp.  148,  150  (Sind,  Karachi  Mus.;  Rajputana  [Bellety  Coll.], 
X.  Kashmir,  Chitral  [Daly  Coll.],  Afghanistan  [Green  Coll.]):  Deriugin  (Proc.  St. 
Petersburg  Naturalists  Soc,  Russian  Text),  XXXVI,  pt.  1  and  3,  Authors  separate 
(Andera,  near  Sumbar,  Transcaspia) ;  Nikolsky  (Fauna  Russia  and  Neighboring  Coun- 
tries, Russian  Text),  1915,  I,  p.  508  (Reports  specimens  obtained  by  Vasiliev,  1904, 
Arvaz  Pass  at  Korpet-dag) ;  Ingoldsby  and  Proctor,  Journ.  Bombay  Nat.  Hist.  Soc, 
XXIX,  Apr.  20,  1923,  p.  126  (Kaur  Bridge,  Ladha,  Wana,  in  Waziristan,  N.  W. 
Frontier  Province). 

History.  The  two  first  specimens  of  this  species  were,  so  far  as 
is  known,  collected  in  the  Salt  range  in  Punjab,  by  William  Theo- 
bald, who  was,  at  that  time,  a  member  of  the  Geological  Survey  of 
India.  In  1854  Blyth,  curator  of  the  Zoological  Department  of  the 
Museum  of  the  Asiatic  Society  of  Bengal,  described  the  same  two 
specimens  under  the  name  of  Eurylepis  taeniolatus,  at  the  same 
time  making  them  the  type  of  a  new  genus.  The  descriptions  leave 
much  to  be  desired.  The  characters  of  the  head  scales  are  said  to 
be  as  in  Anolis  pave  and  Scincus  pavimentatus  Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire, 
in  Savigny,  Desc.  Egypt.  It  is  apparent  that  a  very  hasty  examina- 
tion of  the  details  of  the  animals  was  made,  for  later  authors  have 
pointed  out  errors  in  the  description.  In  1866  (1868)  Theobald,  in 
preparing  a  catalogue  of  the  reptiles  in  the  Museum  of  the  Asiatic 
Society  of  Bengal,  describes  Plestiodon  scutatus  as  a  new  species, 
from  two  adult  specimens  without  data  regarding  locality  or  col- 
lector. It  seems  apparent  that  these  two  are  really  the  types  of 
Blyth's  Eurylepis  taeniolatus,  since  the  catalogue  apparently  takes 


112  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

no  cognizance  of  other  specimens,  or  of  the  species  taeniolatus. 
Fortunately  the  description  is  clear  and  the  more  essential  char- 
acters are  recorded.  The  measurement  of  the  total  length  is  some- 
what different  (9.75  as  to  9  inches;  tail  length,  5.75  as  to  5^  inches). 
The  second  of  the  two  specimens  may  have  been  measured.  In 
1870  T.  C.  Jerdon  obtained  and  reported  a  specimen,  which  was 
identified  as  scutatns,  from  the  Alpine  Punjab  on  the  route  from 
Jhelum  into  Kashmir.  This  specimen  was  apparently  sold  to  the 
British  Museum  and  is  now  No.  70, 11,  29,  9  in  that  institution. 

Anderson  (1871),  while  discussing  the  genus  Eurylepis,  gives  a 
careful  and  a  somewhat  more  extended  description  of  the  types  of 
Eurylepis  taeniolatus  Blyth.  He  states:  "Both  Blyth  and  Theo- 
bald have  fallen  into  some  inaccuracies  regarding  certain  of  their 
characters.  The  former  says  that  the  nostril  is  pierced  in  a  small, 
separate,  nasal  shield,  an  error  repeated  by  Theobald.  Mr.  Blyth 
also  states  that  the  lower  eyelid  has  a  translucent  disk,  but  Mr. 
Theobald  more  accurately  describes  it  as  scaley  with  a  transverse 
row  of  large  plates.  He,  however,  says  the  body  is  surrounded  by 
23  rows  of  scales,  while  the  two  specimens  exhibit  only  21  in  the 
middle  of  the  body,  and  Blyth  limited  them  to  19." 

It  is  self-evident  that  Anderson  regarded  the  types  of  both  species 
to  have  been  founded  on  the  same  specimens,  and  places  scutatus 
Theobald  as  an  absolute  synonym  of  taeniolatus  Blyth. 

Stoliczka  (1872)  reports  specimens  from  Kachh.  Theobald  (1876), 
in  his  Descriptive  Catalogue  of  the  Reptiles  of  British  India,  rec- 
ognizes only  one  species,  Eumeces  taeniolatus,  and  places  his 
species  scutatus  as  a  synonym  and  gives  as  measurements:  length 
of  body,  3.75;  tail,  5.25;  totaling  9  inches — the  total  length  given 
by  Blyth  and  perhaps  an  admission  of  his  own  error  in  the  original 
description. 

W.  J.  Blanford  (1875,  and  2d  Yarkand  Mission  Rept.),  reports 
on  a  specimen,  collected  on  the  road  from  Mari  to  Srinagar  in 
Kashmir,  which,  if  indeed  of  this  species,  is  one  of  truly  enormous 
size  (18  inches  in  total  length,  of  which  the  tail  [probably  re- 
generated] is  only  6  inches). 

Boulenger  (1887)  again  rescues  scutatus  from  synonymy,  de- 
scribing the  species  from  T.  C.  Jerdon's  specimen  and  a  half-grown 
specimen  collected  by  Theobald,  which  was  then  in  the  British 
Museum;  and  from  another  specimen  lacking  all  data,  he  describes 
a  form  as  Eumeces  taeniolatus.  From  these  two  descriptions  it 
was  obvious  that  two  species  were  involved,  a  fact  that  was  borne 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  113 

out  by  photographs  of  the  two  forms  furnished  me  by  Mr.  H.  W. 
Parker  of  the  British  Museum.  With  the  publication  of  the  de- 
scription of  Eumeces  managuae  by  Dunn  (1933),  it  became  evident 
that  Boulenger's  specimen  was  of  this  species  and  must  have  origi- 
nated in  Central  America  rather  than  India.  It  agrees  in  practi- 
cally all  essential  details  with  managuae. 

Due  to  the  courtesy  of  Mr.  H.  W.  Parker,  I  have  been  enabled 
to  examine  the  type,  and  unhesitatingly  place  Eumeces  taeniolatus 
Boulenger  (non  Blyth)  as  a  synonym  of  Eumeces  managuae  Dunn. 
i  Note  discussion  of  this  specimen  under  managuae.) 

Diagnosis.  A  large  species  having  a  generalized  pattern  of  three 
wide,  brown  stripes  on  the  body,  a  median  and  two  lateral,  which 
tend  to  become  obscured  with  age  and  replaced  by  irregular  series 
of  darker  angular  spots.  Characterized  by  four  or  five  pairs  of 
nuchals,  followed  by  a  series  of  paired  scales,  which  in  turn  are 
followed  by  a  median  series  of  broad  scales  five  times  as  broad  as 
long,  extending  to  near  point  of  insertion  of  hind  limbs;  a  large 
postnasal;  two  loreals;  two  (rarely  one)  postmentals;  four  supra- 
oculars, followed  by  a  much  enlarged  posterior  superciliary  appear- 
ing much  like  a  fifth  supraocular.  Frontal  in  contact  with  inter- 
parietal, which  is  not  inclosed  by  the  parietals;  snout  narrow,  com- 
pressed, the  portion  of  the  rostral  visible  above  very  large,  nearly 
equal  in  area  to  the  frontonasal.  Limbs  small,  widely  separated 
when  adpressed;  plates  bordering  heel  subequal,  not  greatly  en- 
larged; superciliaries  separated  from  upper  palpebral  scales;  inner 
preanal  scales  overlapping  outer. 

Description  of  species.  (From  Field  Museum,  No.  1868,  "Puli 
Hatun,"  Transcaspia.)  Head  small,  narrowed  anteriorly;  body 
elongate,  moderately  slender.  Portion  of  rostral  appearing  above 
more  than  two  thirds  the  size  of  the  frontonasal,  more  or  less 
pointed  behind,  narrowly  separating  the  nasals,  the  anterior  por- 
tions of  which  are  broadly  visible  above;  supranasals  smaller  than 
nasals,  nearly  transversely  placed,  forming  a  median  suture,  touch- 
ing postnasals,  and  narrowly  (on  one  side)  the  first  loreal;  fronto- 
nasal broader  than  long,  broadly  in  contact  with  the  first  loreal  (on 
one  side  also  with  the  postnasal)  ;  prefrontals  relatively  large, 
broadly  in  contact  mesially,  forming  a  much  longer  suture  with  the 
first  than  with  the  second  loreal;  the  suture  with  superciliary  larger 
than  that  with  the  first  supraocular;  frontal  truncate  anteriorly, 
forming  a  very  obtuse  angle,  constricted  medially,  posterior  width 
equal   to    anterior   and   with    a    slight  rounded   projection    on   its 

8—1123 


114 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


posterior  edge  in  contact  with  the  interparietal;  frontal  touching 
three  supraoculars;  frontoparietals  smaller  than  prefrontals,  sepa- 
rated narrowly;  parietals  truncate  behind,  in  general  the  shape  of 
a  parallelogram,  not  inclosing  the  interparietal,  separated  or  only- 
minutely  in  contact  with  the  fourth  supraocular,  being  separated  by 
the  very  large  posterior  superciliary  which  appears  like  a  fifth 
supraocular;  interparietal  of  moderate  size,  and  of  typical  shape; 
four  pairs  of  broad  nuchals;  nasal  large,  higher  than  wide,  the 
nostril  pierced  anterior  to  the  rostrolabial  suture,  distinctly  divided 
by  grooves,  the  anterior  part  very  much  the  larger;  postnasal 
large   (loreal,  according  to  Boulenger   [1887]),  equally  in  contact 


Fig.  9.  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth).  E.H.T.  Collection,  No.  4888; 
Puli  Hatun,  Transcaspia.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  13  mm.;  width,  11mm. 

with  the  first  two  labials,  much  higher  than  posterior  part  of  nasal ; 
first  loreal  nearly  as  large  as  second,  higher  than  second,  nearly  as 
long  as  high,  touching  second  and  third  labials;  second  loreal  only 
minutely  longer  than  high ;  two  presuboculars,  the  anterior  touching 
two  labials ;  four  very  unequal  postsuboculars ;  one  small  preocular ; 
two  small  postoculars;  eight  superciliaries,  last  as  large  as  first; 
upper  palpebral  scales  separated  from  superciliaries  by  a  complete 
series  of  scales  on  upper  eyelids;  three  enlarged  plates  on  lower 
eyelid,  separated  from  the  subocular  by  three  irregular  rows  of 
tubercles;  primary  temporal  of  moderate  size;  upper  secondary 
temporal  large,  widened  posteriorly ;  lower  secondary  somewhat  fan- 
shaped,  very  narrowly  in  contact  with  primary;  tertiary  temporal 
elongated,  forming  a  suture  with  upper  secondary,  separated  from 
ear  by  three  scales. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  115 

Eight  upper  labials,  the  eighth  somewhat  larger  than  seventh; 
five  labials  preceding  the  subocular,  the  suture  of  first  with  the 
rostral  about  two  thirds  the  height  of  the  scale;  last  labial  separated 
from  the  ear  by  four  pairs  of  post  labial  scales,  covering  a  distance 
much  greater  than  the  length  of  last  labial,  the  upper  scales  of  the 
first  two  pairs  much  the  largest  of  the  series,  the  others  decreasing 
in  size;  extent  of  the  mental  on  the  labial  border  distinctly  greater 
than  that  of  rostral;  two  postmentals,  the  first  much  shorter  than 
mental;  first  pair  of  chinshields  shortest  and  smallest,  in  contact; 
second  pair  largest;  third  pair  much  narrower  than  second,  their 
posterior  edge  rounded;  these  followed  by  a  pair  of  elongated  post- 
genial  scales,  not  strongly  differentiated  from  other  scales  following 
chinshields,  each  bordered  on  its  inner  edge  by  a  scale  similar  in 
shape  and  size. 

Ear  opening  relatively  small,  with  three  auricular  lobules,  upper 
much  the  largest;  about  22  scales  surround  the  ear;  line  separating 
the  postauricular  scales  and  lateral  neck  scales,  distinct,  vertical; 
line  separating  the  lateral  neck  scales  from  the  suprabrachials 
arises  above  anterior  point  of  insertion  of  arm;  about  81  scales 
from  parietals  to  above  anus:  these  consist  of  four  pairs  of  nuchals 
followed  by  twelve  paired  widened  scales,  these  followed  by  57 
single  median  scales,  a  little  more  than  five  times  as  broad  as  long; 
then  follows  eight  paired  scales;  32  rows  of  scales  around  neck  be- 
hind ear;  27  about  narrow  part  of  neck;  29  in  axillary  region;  21 
about  middle  of  body;  twelve  about  base  of  tail;  lateral  rows 
parallel,  the  scales  on  sides  smallest;  six  preanal  scales,  the  median 
pair  very  large,  almost  as  long  as  wide ;  the  median  preanals  overlap 
the  outer  scales;  the  posterior  line  of  the  preanal  scale  not  or  but 
slightly  differentiated;  small  series  of  scales  on  posterior  anal 
border  missing;  a  series  of  broad  subcaudal  scales;  regenerated  tail 
with  a  broad  dorsal  series. 

Limbs  relatively  small;  about  fifteen  scales  about  insertion  of 
arm,  with  two  rows  of  minute  granules  in  axilla;  21  about  insertion 
of  hind  leg,  with  one  or  two  rows  of  minute  granules  behind  inser- 
tion. Palm  with  a  scattered  series  of  large,  flat  tubercles,  inter- 
spered  with  smaller  tubercles;  outer  wrist  tubercle  not  strongly 
differentiated;  lamellar  formula  of  fingers:  6;  8;  12;  13;  7.  Fourth 
toe  only  slightly  longer  than  third;  six  subequal  scales  forming  a 
continuous  series  on  heel;  sole  with  numerous  larger,  scattered, 
tuberculate  scales;  lamellar  formula  of  toes:  6;  9;  14;  15;  11; 
claws  long,  the  upper  terminal  lamella  hood-like,  not  tightly  bound 


116 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


about  base  of  claw;  toes  surrounded  by  only  dorsal  and  ventral 
series  save  on  outer  side  of  the  proximal  joint. 

Color.  Above  generally  putty  gray  to  gray-brown,  the  median 
dorsal  area  bearing  a  browner  stripe  extending  to  tail,  but  growing 
indistinct  posteriorly,  bearing  quadrangular  brown  spots  more  or 
less  irregularly  distributed  and  not  forming  rows ;  spots  more  numer- 
ous anteriorly;  first  lateral  scale  row  with  a  regular  series  of  brown 
clots  on  alternate  scales;  on  sides  another  brownish  stripe  covering 
part  of  the  second,  third,  and  fourth  rows;  scales  of  the  second, 
third,  and  fourth  rows  with  brown  spots  usually  appearing  on  every 
other  scale,  frequently  forming  vertical  series;  a  few  small,  whitish 
flecks  on  lateral  scales  alternating  with  the  vertical  series  of  brown 
dots;  head  colored  like  body  with  a  few  brown  flecks  along  margins 
of  scales;  upper  labials  generally  light,  slightly  edged  with  brown- 
ish; the  temporal  scales  with  definite  brown  spots;  entire  ventral 
surface  immaculate  cream,  the  color  extending  up  to  fourth  scale 
row  but  becoming  slightly  tinged  with  bluish  gray;  however,  the 
fifth  row  has  an  irregular  series  of  brown  spots;  regenerated  tail 
fawn-colored  with  very  small  irregular  brown  spots. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  taeniolatus  (Blyth) 


Museum . 
Number*. 


Snout  to  vent.  .  . 

Tail 

Total  length 

Snout  to  foreleg . 
Snout  to  ear .  .  .  . 
Snout  to  eye . .  .  . 
Aidlla  to  groin .  . 
Width  of  body .  . 
Width  of  head... 
Length  of  head. . 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Longest  toe 


Field 
186S 


105 


24 
16 

6 
69 
14 
11 
13 
20 
24 

9 


E.H.T. 

4888 


98.2 
154 
252.2 
25.2 
15 
5.8 
63 
14 

10.4 
12.2 
19 

22.5 
8.2 


M.C.Z. 
4370 


132 


33 

16 
5.5 
86 


14 
15 
22 
33 
9 


M.C.Z. 
4493 


117 

178 

295 

28.5 

14 

5 

76 


13 

15.2 
23 
30 


M.C.Z. 
7192 


104 


67 


24 

7 


*  Nos.  1868  and  4888,  Puli  Hatun,  Transcaspia;  4370  and  4493,  Amballa,  India;  7192, 
Karachi,  India. 

Variation.  Only  a  very  limited  number  of  specimens  have  been 
available  for  study.  It  is  apparent  that  a  greater  amount  of  varia- 
tion may  be  present  than  is  shown  in  these  five  specimens,  and 
in  published  data. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  117 

The  number  of  scale  rows  is  21  normally;  a  single  specimen 
(Amballa,  Ind.)  has  19.  Blyth's  statement  of  19  scales  in  the  type 
is  contradicted  (see  History).  All  the  other  specimens  have  21. 
Scale  rows  behind  car  about  neck,  32-33;  about  constricted  part  of 
neck.  27-29;  about  axilla,  29-30;  about  base  of  tail,  13-15.  Three 
specimens  have  the  upper  labials,  eight-eight;  one,  seven-seven 
(Amballa).  Scales  about  ear  vary  20-21;  there  are  four  pairs  of 
nuchals  in  all;  the  number  of  pairs  of  divided  median  scales  vary 
from  12-12  (Puli-Hatun)  to  15-16  (Karachi).  All  show  only  four 
supraoculars,  but  the  last  superciliary  is  enlarged  and  might  be 
mistaken  for  a  fifth;  postmental  divided;  postnasal  large  in  all. 
Boulenger  interprets  this  scale  as  a  loreal  scale  making  three  loreals ; 
its  position  and  relationship  to  adjoining  scales  makes  it  imperative 
to  recognize  this  scale  as  the  postnasal  enlarged.  The  last  labial 
(seventh  or  eighth)  is  largest;  the  nasal  is  of  moderate  size;  the 
relation  of  the  nostril  to  the  suture  is  the  same  in  all;  the  fronto- 
nasal and  frontal  are  separated  in  all.  The  frontonasal  touches  the 
postnasal  as  well  as  the  first  loreal;  three  supraoculars  touch  the 
frontal,  and  the  frontal  is  invariably  in  contact  with  the  inter- 
parietal; two  presuboculars,  normally;  one  in  the  Karachi  specimen. 
The  postsuboculars  are  4-4  or  5-5,  the  anterior  (inferior)  ones  small, 
not  well  differentiated;  ear  lobules  3-3  or  3-4;  these  are  usually 
somewhat  wrinkled  or  puckered;  the  formula  of  the  postlabial  series 
in  front  of  ear  usually  1;  1;  Vi;  Vi;  Vi;  in  one  specimen  it  is  H;  Vi; 
1;  1.  The  total  number  of  scales  from  parietals  to  above  anus,  78  to 
83,  the  lowest  number  being  in  the  specimen  from  Amballa,  India, 
the  highest,  the  one  from  Karachi.  The  character  of  the  heel  and 
palm  scales  is  similar  in  all.  In  all,  the  tertiary  temporal  is  divided, 
or,  two  are  present,  the  lower  not  touching  the  upper  secondary 
temporal.  The  adpressed  limbs  are  separated,  in  all,  by  six  or  seven' 
scale  lengths.  In  all,  the  upper  palpebral  scales  are  separated  from 
superciliaries  by  a  row  of  granules;  and  the  inner  preanal  scales 
overlap  the  outer  smaller  ones;  Annandale  (1905)  points  out  that 
one  of  the  types  has  two,  the  other,  one,  postmental. 

The  color  is  generally  the  same.  The  stripes  apparently  are  more 
definite  in  younger  specimens.  The  whitish  dots  on  the  side  vary 
in  distinctness;  the  annulation  of  the  tail  is  more  marked  in  Trans- 
caspian  specimens. 

The  very  large  specimen  mentioned  by  Blanford  gives  a  maxi- 
mum snout  to  vent  measurement  of  approximately  175  mm. 


118 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Concerning  a  British  Museum  specimen  from  El  Kubar,  S.  W. 
Arabia,  Mr.  H.  W.  Parker  writes: 

"The  El  Kubar  specimen  might  conceivably  be  racially  distinct,  but  on  the 
basis  of  a  single  specimen  it  would,  I  think,  be  very  unwise  to  describe  it. 
The  color  pattern  is  more  intense  than  in  other  specimens,  so  that  the  lateral 
and  middorsal  dark  bands,  instead  of  being  composed  of  spots,  are  solid  from 
the  forelimbs  forward  and  the  middorsal  extends  forward  over  the  head  to  the 
rostral;  the  lower  surface  of  the  tail  is  beset  with  brown  spots  like  its  upper 
surface." 

Distribution.  The  present  known  distribution  is  western  Asia 
from  S.  W.  Arabia  to  Yarkand,  including  Transcaspia,  Persia, 
Afghanistan,  Baluchistan  and  northwestern  India.  It  is  not  known 
from  Asia  Minor  or  Trans-Caucasia. 


Fig.  10.  Distribution  in  Asia  of  Eumeces  tacniolatus  (Blyth)O;  Eumeces 
zarudnyi  Nikolsky  □  and  Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald)  A.  Distributional  data 
on  Eumeces  princeps  are  very  incomplete. 

Locality  records.     (In  certain  cases  I  have  not  been  able  to  check 

identifications  of  material  on  which  some  of  the  locality  records  are 

based,  since  they  are  in  European  or  Asiatic  museums.) 

Arabia:    El  Kubar,  S.  W.  Arabia  (Brit,  Mus.  1,  Bury  Coll.). 

Transcaspia:     Puli    Hatun    (Pul-i-Khatun)    (Brit.    Mus.   8,    Eylandt   Coll.); 

Bacharden  (Senckenberg  1,  A.  Zander  Coll.) ;  Ai  Dare  (Senckenberg  1,  0. 

Boettger  Coll.) ;  Arvuz  Pass  at  Kopet-dag  (Nikolsky,  1915) ;  Durun  near 

Askhabad    and    Bakharden    (Mikhailovski,    1904);    Andera    near    Dumbar 

(Univ.  of  Petrograd  2;  Nikolsky,  1915). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  119 

Baluchistan:    Kondalo   (Munchen   1.  Zugmeyer  Coll.);   Bela   (Miinchen   1, 

Zugmeyer  Coll.). 

Afghanistan:    (Indian  Mus.,  Green  Coll.;  Annandale,  1905). 

India:  Sind  (Indian  Mus.);  Rajputana  (Indian  Mus.,  N.  Billety  Coll.);  N. 
Kashmir  (Indian  Mus.,  2d  Yarkand  Miss.);  Chitral  (Indian  Mus.,  F.  J. 
Daly  Coll.);  Waziristan  N.  W.  India,  Kaur  Bridge  (7  spec),  Ladha  (8 
spec),  Wana  (19  spec.)  (Ingoldsbv  and  Proctor,  1923);  Punjab  (type  local- 
ity. Mus.  As.  Soc  Bengal  2) ;  Alpine  Punjab  on  the  route  from  Jhelum 
into  Kashmir  (Brit.  Mus.  1,  Jerdon  Coll.) ;  Urira.  N.  W.  Kachh  (Stoliczka, 
1872) ;  Chakoti  on  the  road  from  Mari  to  Srinigar  in  Kashmir  (Blanford, 
2d  Yarkand  Miss.). 

SCHNEIDERII  GROUP 

The  species  and  subspecies  included  in  this  group  are  character- 
ized by  the  absence  of  a  postnasal;  the  palpebral  scales  separated 
from  the  superciliaries;  one  or  two  postmental  shields;  the  more 
median  preanal  scales  overlap  the  outer  ones;  a  rather  large  area 
of  small  granular  or  pavement-like  scales  behind  insertion  of  hind 
limb;  when  hind  limb  is  laid  back  along  tail  a  small  pocket  is 
formed  lateral  to  anus. 

The  forms  included  in  the  group  are  Eumeces  algeriensis  algeri- 
ensis,  E.  algeriensis  meridionalis,  E.  pavimentatus,  E.  zarudnyi,  E. 
princeps  and  E.  schneiderii. 

The  taxonomy  of  this  group,  occupying  territory  in  western  Asia 
and  northern  Africa,  has  long  been  in  a  confused  condition.  That 
certain  forms  were  long  known  before  the  time  of  Linnaeus  is  evi- 
denced by  a  form  appearing  about  1640  in  a  work  by  Ulyssis 
Aldrovandi  (Quad.  Digit.  Ovip.,  Lib.  1,  p.  660)  under  the  name 
Lacerta  Cyprius  scincoides,  a  name  placed  as  a  synonym  of  Lacerta 
aurata  by  Linnaeus  in  the  10th  edition  of  Systema  Naturae.  It 
appears,  however,  fairly  certain  that  the  Lacerta  aurata*  is  a  species 
quite  distinct  from  the  Cyprian  lizard  illustrated  by  Aldrovandi. 

The  first  "Linnaean"  name  applicable  to  any  skink  of  this  group 
is  Scincus  schneiderii  of  Daudin  (1602,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  291-292), 
which  he  describes  as  follows:  "Major,  supra  lucidus  fuscescens 
lined  longitudinale  pallida  in  utroque  latere,  subtiis  albescens  caudd 
dwplb  longiore."  In  the  synonymy  he  cites  several  references 
iSeba,  Schneider,  Gronovius,  Lacepede),  all  to  authors  who  used 
names  which  are  non-Linnaean.    He  states:  "J'ai  rapporte  a  l'anolis 

*  In  regard  to  the  identity  of  Lacerta  aurata  consult  the  discussions  of  the  following 
authors:  Dumeril  and  Bibron,  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  pp.  702,  703;  Wiegmann,  Archiv.  fiir  Mus., 
1837,  pt.  1,  p.  134;  Gravenhorst,  Nova  Acta  Acad.  Leopold  Carol.,  XXIII,  pt.  1,  p.  321, 
pi.  XXXII:  Peters,  Monatsb.  Akad.  Wiss.  Berl.,  1864,  p.  51.  On  the  other  hand,  Gray 
(Cat.  Spec.  Liz.  in  Brit.  Mus.,  1845,  pp.  91,  92)  applies  the  name  to  a  north  African 
Eumeces,  and  Giinther  (1864,  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London)  applies  the  name  to  a  Eumeces  from 
the  Dead  Sea  region;  he  also  does  the  same  in  the  Reptiles  of  British  India  (1864),  giving 
Persia  as  a  locality. 


120  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

dore  la  plupart  des  synonymes  qui  ont  ete  regardes  par  Lacepede 
comme  semblables  au  scinque  dore;  mais  je  dois  avouer  ici  que  j'ai 
cru  necessaire  de  m'y  determiner,  dans  l'espoir  qu'on  pourra  parvenir 
dans  la  suite  a  eclaircir  cette  partie  reelment  obscure  de  l'histoire 
naturelle  des  sauriens." 

One  gathers  from  the  text  that  the  skink  Scincus  schneiderii  is 
described  from  a  specimen  in  "la  galerie  du  museum  d'Histoire 
Naturelle"  (Paris).* 

This  species  is  compared  with  the  scinque  rembruni.  He  further 
states:  "Sa  couleur  est  d'un  brun  clair  tres-luisant  en  dessus, 
lorsqu'il  court  an  soleil;  mais  il  ne  paroit  pas  avoir  l'eclat  de  Tor 
pendant  qu'il  est  vivant;  aussi  ne  peut-on  pas  lui  paisser  l'epithete 
de  dore;  c'est  pourquoi  j'ai  prefere  lui  donner  celle  de  schneiderien, 
.  .  .  La  couleur  d'un  brun  clair,  que  regne  dessus  ce  grand 
scinque,  est  tranchee  sur  chaque  flanc  par  une  ligne  droite  et 
longitudinale  blanchatre,  que  va  depuis  les  bras  j usque  aupres  des 
cuisses;  le  dessous  de  cet  animal  est  blanchatre,  sans  aucune  tache 
et  sans  aucun  grain  poreux  sons  les  cuisses.  La  queue  est  cylin- 
drique,  et  deux  fois  environ  aussi  longue  que  le  reste.  Tous  les 
ecailles  qui  la  recouvrent  sont  rhomboidales,  presque  hexagones  et 
un  peu  imbriquees." 

The  measurements  given  (reduced  to  millimeters)  are:  total 
length,  approximately  392  mm.;  head  and  body,  114  mm.;  tail,  278 
mm.;  hind  leg,  46  mm.;  front  legs,  "sont  plus  courtes." 

Shaw  (1802),  under  the  name  Lacerta  rufescens,  describes  a 
species  (probably  from  Seba,  p.  112,  taf.  105,  fig.  3),  giving  as  the 
habitat  Arabia,  Egypt  and  Cyprus,  and  placing  Lacerta  Cyprius 
scincoides,  Lacerta  aurata?  L.,  and  Lacerta  maritima  maxima  Seba 
as  synonyms.  It  appears  that  he  had  not  seen  Daudin's  work, 
which  was  probably  published  when  Shaw's  description  was  written. 
The  characters  offered  are  as  follows:  Fifteen  inches  or  more  in 
length  from  nose  to  the  end  of  the  tail,  color  pale  rufous  brown,  with 
a  paler  stripe  down  the  back  and  along  each  side;  the  head  is 
covered  in  front  with  large  angular  scales ;  the  body,  limbs  and  tail 
with  rounded  ones ;  legs  short  and  thick.  It  is  highly  probable  that 
Shaw's  name  represents  a  composite  of  more  than  one  species,  and 
cannot  be  certainly  identified. 

In  1820  Merrem  (Syst.  Amph.,  3,  1820,  p.  71)  used  the  name 
Cepedii,  based  on  Lacepede's  description  of  Le  Dore.     Since  the 

*  According  to  Dumeril  and  Bibron  (1839,  V,  p.  703),  it  is  the  same  specimen  which 
served  as  a  model  for  the  description  and  the  figure  in  Lacepede's  Histoire  Naturelle  des 
Quadrupedes  Ovipares  et  des  Serpens  (1788-'90,  I,  p.  384,  pi.  25).  It  was  still  in  the 
museum  in  1839. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  121 

description  is  from  a  specimen  which  is  the  type  of  schneiderii  it 
is  obvious  that  these  names  are  synonyms.  In  Savigny's  Descrip- 
tion de  l'Egypte  (Histoire  Naturclle  Reptiles,  published  presumably 
in  1827)  appears  descriptions  of  two  forms,  one,  Scincus  schneiderii 
(p.  135,  pi.  3,  fig.  3;  L'anolis  gigantesque),  a  more  or  less  uniformly 
colored  specimen  with  a  light  lateral  stripe;  and  a  second  species, 
Scincus  pavimentatus  (p.  138,  pi.  IV,  fig.  4),  represented  as  being 
brown  with  light  dorsal  lines.  Thus,  pavimentatus  is  apparently 
the  first  name  for  the  species  having  a  series  of  dorsal,  light,  narrow 
lines. 

The  name  Scincus  cyprius  of  Cuvier  (1829,  Reg.  Anim.,  2d  Ed., 
p.  62)  was  used  for  a  form  occurring  in  "Levante,"  and  harks  back 
to  the  Lacerta  Cyprius  scincoides  of  Aldrovandi,  and  Eumeces 
schneiderii,  portrayed  by  Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire.  Gray  (1831)  used 
the  name  Tiliqua  cyprinus,  but  I  am  uncertain  whether  this  was 
intended  as  a  new  name  or  is  an  error  or  emendation  for  Cuvier's 
cyprius. 

Dumeril  and  Bibron  (1839,  V,  p.  701)  describe  the  skinks  of 
north  Africa  under  the  name  Plestiodon  aldrovandii,  including  a 
specimen  from  Bone,  Algeria,  and  two  from  Egypt,  one  of  which, 
if  I  interpret  correctly,  served  as  the  type  of  Le  Dore  Lacepede, 
and  of  Scincus  schneiderii  Daudin.  In  consequence,  it  is,  at  least 
in  part,  a  synonym  of  schneiderii.  In  the  list  of  synonyms  is  given 
one  of  the  forms  listed  as  VAnolis  gigantesque  and  Scincus  schneiderii 
by  Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire  in  the  Descript.  Egypt;  but  Geoffroy-St, 
Hillarie's  other  form,  Scincus  pavimentatus,  apparently  is  over- 
looked, or  at  least  no  allocation  of  this  name  could  be  found.  It 
is  mentioned  on  page  629  in  a  quotation  from  Wiegmann. 

The  discussion  given  by  Dumeril  and  Bibron  makes  it  evident  that 
Lacerta  aurata  Linne  is  a  species  different  from  aldrovandii.  They 
also  give  a  discussion  of  other  synonyms  of  aldrovandii,  but  offer 
no  reason  for  disregarding  the  appellation  given  by  Daudin.  The 
Algerian  specimen  listed  is  very  likely  a  specimen  of  Eumeces 
algeriensis. 

Eichwald  (1839)  described  as  new  a  species  (princeps)  from 
western  Asia  ("In  ora  caspia  occidentali,  ad  montes  praesertim 
Talyschenses''') .  The  description  (in  Latin)  is  good  and  refers  to 
a  species  with  the  color  of  the  head,  back,  limbs  and  tail  uniform 
dark  gray,  and  with  a  lateral  light  line. 

From  the  foregoing  it  is  evident  that,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Geoffroy-St.  Hillaires,  who  recognized  two  species,  the  authors  who 


122  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

preceded  them,  and  those  who  followed  for  many  years,  believed 
that  there  was  only  a  single  species,  and  each  devised  a  name  of 
his  own  choosing. 

It  was  not  until  Boulenger's  catalogue  (Vol.  Ill)  appeared  in 
1887  that  the  name  schneiderii  was  reestablished,  the  name  having 
been  overshadowed  by  the  names  pavimentatus  and  aldrovandii, 
both  actually  used  for  all  the  various  forms  of  the  group,  which  were 
regarded  apparently  as  a  single  species.  Before  Boulenger's  cata- 
logue appeared,  two  subspecies  were  described:  Eumeces  pavi- 
mentatus  var.  algeriensis  by  Peters  (1864)  from  the  western  part 
of  north  Africa;  and  Eumeces  pavimentatus  var.  syriacus  was  de- 
scribed by  Boettger  in  1883.  The  type  locality  of  the  latter  was 
"Sarona  bei  Jaffa,  Syria."  This  specimen  is  referred  by  Mertens 
(who  had  ready  access  to  the  type)  to  the  synonymy  of  schneiderii 
pavimentatus. 

As  remarked,  Boulenger  (1887)  revived  Daudin's  name  schnei- 
derii for  the  British  Museum  skinks  of  the  genus  (Tunis,  Egypt, 
Syria,  Armenia,  Persia,  Baluchistan)  and  retained  Peter's  pavi- 
mentatus algeriensis  for  the  species  occurring  in  Algeria  and  Mo- 
rocco under  the  specific  designation  of  algeriensis. 

In  1899  Nikolsky  described  Eumeces  zarudnyi  from  Persian 
specimens  collected  by  N.  A.  Zarudny  in  the  provinces  of  Kirman 
and  Seistan,  Persia.  Domergue  (1909)  later  described  a  subspecies, 
algeriensis  meridionalis,  from  Ain  Sefra,  Algeria. 

Robert  Mertens  (1920),  in  a  paper  under  the  title  "Uber  die 
geographischen  Formen  von  Eumeces  schneiderii  Daudin,"  makes 
a  first  attempt  to  review  the  group,  and  he  later  (Nov.,  1924)  makes 
a  second  revision.  In  this  latter  work  he  recognizes  four  subspecies 
of  schneiderii,  namely,  schneiderii,  pavimentatus,  cyprius  and  al- 
geriensis. Schneiderii  pavimentatus  Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire  is  used 
for  the  Syrian  form,  including  as  a  synonym  Boettger's  (1883) 
syriaca.  For  the  form  from  Algeria  and  Morocco  the  name  al- 
geriensis Peters  is  used,  including  in  the  synonymy  a  subspecies, 
algeriensis  meridionalis  Domergue,  as  well  as  Plestiodon  aldrovandii 
(part.)  Dumeril  and  Bibron  and  Plestiodon  auratus  (part.)  Gray. 

He  states  "Nach  Priifung  mehrerer  Stiicke  aus  Nordafrica,  bin  ich 
zum  Ergebnis  gekommen,  dass  der  Unterschied  zwischen  Eumeces 
schneiderii  cyprius  und  dieser  Form  [algeriensis]  gar  kein  so  grosser 
ist,  und  da  diese  beiden  Formen  nirgends  nebeneinander  vorkommen, 
halte  ich  cs  fiir  richtiger  die  westliche  Form  als  Unterart  zu  Eumeces 
schneiderii  zu  stellen."  For  the  species  occurring  in  Lower  Egypt 
to  eastern  Algeria  the  name  schneiderii  cyprius  Cuvier  is  used. 


Taylor:    The  Gkxis  Kvmkcks  123 

The  name  given  by  Cuvier  is  based  on  Aldrovandi's  Lacerta 
cyprius  scincoides,  and  on  Geoffroy's  plate  (Desc.  of  Egypt,  pi.  Ill, 
fig.  3),  which  would  make  it  in  part  synonymous  with  schneiderii. 
(The  figure  of  Lacerta  cyprius  scincoides  of  Aldrovandi  [Quad. 
Dig.  Vivip.,  1663,  p.  660]  is  without  any  marks  of  distinction  save 
for  a  light  stripe  on  the  sides,  the  scales  being  drawn  with  no 
attempt  at  accuracy.) 

The  typical  form  schneiderii,  Mertens  believes,  is  restricted  to  a 
west  Asiatic  form.  He  states  (Mertens,  1924a,  footnote) :  "Hen- 
Prof.  Lorenz  Muller  in  Miinchen  machte  mich  kiirzlich  darauf  auf- 
merksam,  dass  der  Daudin'schen  Originalbeschreibung  von  Eumeces 
schneiderii  vermutlich  diese  westasiatische  Form  zu  Grunde  lag." 

On  what  such  a  judgment  is  based  I  am  uncertain.  I  presume  on 
the  meager  data  given  as  regards  color.  I  believe  beyond  question 
that  the  type  locality  is  Egypt  or  Sinai,  as  the  type  specimen,  as 
already  mentioned,  also  served  as  a  cotype  for  Plcstiodon  aldro- 
vandii  and  was  one  of  two  Egyptian  specimens  mentioned  as  follows 
by  Dumeril  and  Bibron  (1839) :  "Cette  espece  se  trouve  en  Egypte 
et  en  Algerie;  nous  en  possedons  deux  individus  de  premier  de  ces 
deux  pays;  et  un  troisieme  qui  nous  a  ete  envoye  vivant  de  la 
province  d'Alger  par  M.  Guyon."  Again  speaking  of  the  type 
of  Daudin's  schneiderii,  they  state:  "Individu  qui  existe  encore 
aujourd'hui  dans  notre  Musee  National." 

To  anyone  who  has  followed  the  foregoing  discussion  it  must 
appear  obvious  that  the  confusion  in  the  literature  regarding  these 
forms  is  almost  insurmountable,  and,  as  regards  some  points,  must 
remain  obscure.  The  placing  of  literature  references  under  the 
various  species  must  necessarily  be  subject  to  uncertainty.  The 
uncertain  references  are  left  in  the  synonymy  of  schneiderii. 

A  more  certain  judgment  of  the  status  of  the  various  forms 
of  the  Schneiderii  group  can  only  be  obtained  when  large  series 
are  available  for  study.  My  own  material  is  too  meager  and  from 
too  few  localities  to  determine  relationships,  or  delineate  the  various 
forms  without  some  doubt  as  to  the  validity  of  my  judgments. 

It  is  a  fact  that  as  regards  the  general  pattern  of  head  scales 
there  is  marked  similarity  among  many  of  the  forms.  However, 
there  are  many  characters  usually  not  mentioned  in  descriptions 
which  may  be  regarded  as  important  in  differentiation  of  species 
as  is  the  head  squamation,  such  as  size,  length  of  limb,  scale  rows 
on  limbs,  intercalated  scale  rows  on  toes,  postlabial,  temporal  and 
postgenial  scales. 


124  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

It  is  likely  that  in  these  different  forms  there  may  be  a  tendency 
to  duplicate  color  pattern.  The  lateral  line  and  red,  orange  or 
copper  spotting  is  present  in  several  forms,  and  there  is  likely  to 
be  similar  variation  in  two  or  more  forms.  It  appears  certain  that, 
at  least  in  parts  of  the  territory  occupied  by  the  group,  two  or  more 
forms  may  be  present. 

The  task  of  straightening  out  the  present  tangle  that  obtains 
should  involve  an  examination  by  a  single  person  of  the  material 
in  all  European  collections,  including  all  types,  if  extant,  and  the 
segregation  of  large  series  of  new  material  from  numerous  localities 
throughout  the  range  of  the  group.  Until  this  is  done,  some  doubt 
and  confusion  must  remain.  I  know  of  no  more  worthy  task  in  the 
field  of  herpetology. 

Key  to  the  Forms  of  the  Schneiderii  Group. 

A.    No  lateral  line  of  cream,  orange  or  red  on  the  sides  of  the  body;  a  pattern  of  light  trans- 
verse lines  extending  to  or  nearly  to  abdomen;  auricular  lobules  blunt;  two  scales  occupy 
area  of  the  typical  subocular  labial;  postgenial  scales  small,  about  as  broad  as  long; 
typical  heel  plates  not  strongly  differentiated  from  scales  that  precede  and  follow; 
about  25  scale  rows  around  upper  arm,  27  rows  about  femur;  no  notch  formed  by  the 
second  presubocular  on  the  upper  labial  border;  scales  more  or  less  striated. 
B.    Eight  or  nine  upper  labials;  nasal  divided;  70  scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus; 
30  scales  about  neck  and  30  rows  about  middle  of  body;  20  to  24  about  base  of 
tail;  length  of  frontal  a  little  less  than  its  distance  from  end  of  snout;  subocular 
labial  about  size  of  the  preceding  labials;    pre-  and  postsuboculars  form  a  distinct 
continuous  series;    median    scale    rows    about    one    and    three-fourths    times  as 
wride  as  the  adjoining  scales;  four  or  five  pairs  of  nuchals;  on  inner  side  of  fingers 
the  series  of  scales  intercalated  between  the  dorsal  and  ventral  lamellae  only  at 
base,  with  a  single  scale  near  tips,  except  fifth,  where  the  series  is  complete  from 
base  to  tip;  on  outer  side  the  intercalated  series  is  complete  to  tip  save  on  fifth 
finger;  on  toes  on  inner  side  one  or  two  intercalated  scales  on  basal  phalanx;  on 
outer  side  series  complete  to  tip.     Above  brown,  with  a  series  of  irregular  cross- 
bands  of  cream  or  orange  extending  to  abdomen;  intervening  irregular  rows  of 
ocellated  reddish  spots.     Snout  to  vent  185  mm.     (Algeria  and  Morocco.    Plains 
form.) Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters),   146 

BB.  Similar  in  many  respects  to  E.  a.  algeriensis,  but  scale  rows  27  to  28;  one  pair  of 
nuchals;  fewer  scales  about  base  of  tail ;  60  to  62  scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus; 
scales  of  the  pre-  and  postocular  series  more  elongate;  snout  to  vent  124  mm. 
(Ain  Sefra  and  adjacent  territory.     Plateau  form.) 

Eumeces  algeriensis  meridionalis  Domergue,   152 

AA.    A  lateral  line  to,  and  sometimes  continued  on,  tail;  pattern  of  dorsal  spots,  if  present, 

not  reaching  below  lateral  line;  auricular  lobules  four  to  six,  usually  more  or  less  sharply 

denticulate  (somewhat  short  in  blythianus);  only  one  typical  subocular;  typical  heel 

plates  differentiated  from  adjoining  scales;  postgenial  scales  longer  than  wide;  less  than 

25  scales  around  middle  of  upper  arm;  a  more  or  less  distinct  notch  in  upper  labial 

border  made  by  second  presubocular;  scales  not  striated. 

B.    A  single  postmental.     Thirty  scale  rows  around  middle  of  body;  59  or  60  scales 

from  occiput  to  above  anus;  nasal  divided;  postgenial  only  slightly  longer  than 

wide;  limbs  elongate,  overlapping  when  adpressed;  olive-brown  above,  with  three 

dark  brown  lines  along  back  from  head  to  some  distance  on  the  tail;  a  broad  dark 

band  along  the  side  of  the  body,  below  which  is  a  well-defined  pale  yellowish  band 

extending  from  below  eye  to  some  distance  on  tail;  a  dark  line  below  this;  tail 

slender.     Snout  to  vent,  90  mm.     (Punjab,  India.) 

Eumeces  blythianus  (Anderson),   143 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  125 

BB.    Two  postmentals. 

C.  Tail  red  at  base;  ear  with  five  or  siz  acute  lobules;  scales  in  26  rows;  limbs 
overlap  when  adpressed;  uniform  brownish  gray,  with  a  whitish  lateral  line; 
snout  to  vent,  111mm.      (Southeastern  Persia  [probably  also  Baluchistan].) 

Eumeces  zarudnt/i  Nikolsky,  142 
CC.    Tail  not  red  at  base. 

D.  Nasal  incompletely  divided,  lacking  the  lower  suture  from  nostril  to 
rostral;  plates  on  lower  eyelids  small,  scarcely  differentiated;  66-68 
scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus;  13  scales  around  middle  of  upper 
arm;  20  scale-  about  femur;  -1  scale  tows  about  middle  of  body;  19 
scales  al  out  base  of  tail;    pre-  and  postsubocular  series  discontinuous 

or  nearly  so;  subocular  labial  not  larger  than  certain  preeedin;.'  labials, 
anterior  loreal  a  little  longer  than  high;  on  inner  side  of  fingers  one 
or  two  intercalated  scales,  fifth  with  three;  on  outer  side  the  scales 
half  the  length  of  the  second,  third  and  fourth  fingers;  on  inner  side 
of  toes  one  or  two  scales  at  base;  on  outer  side  the  scales  extend  the 
length  of  first  and  second  toes,  half  the  length  of  the  third  and  fourth. 
Brown  with  a  dim  dorsolateral  lighter  line  and  a  strong  lateral  cream 
line;  eight  rows  of  very  narrow,  discontinuous  cream  lines.  Snout  to 
vent,  136mm.      (Egypt  and  Syria! 

Eumeces  pavimentatus  (Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire),  133 
DD.    Xasal  completely  divided. 

E.  Plates  on  lower  eyelid  large,  much  higher  than  wide;  64  scales 
occiput  to  above  anus;  17  scales  about  middle  of  upper  arm;  24 
scales  around  middle  of  femur;  26  rows  about  body;  19  about 
tail;  pre-  and  postsubocular  series  discontinuous,  or  those  below 
eye  not  differentiated  from  granules  on  eyelid;  subocular  labial 
large,  slightly  longer  than  high,  no  larger  than  certain  preceding 
labials;  anterior  loreal  much  longer  than  high;  on  inner  side  of 
fingers,  intercalated  scales  only  at  base,  save  on  fifth,  where  the 
series  extends  the  length  of  the  digit;  on  outer  side  the  series 
extends  the  length  of  first  and  second  fingers,  on  the  third  and 
fourth  on  the  basal  phalanx  only;  on  outer  side  of  toes  one  or  two 
intercalated  scales  at  base  only;  on  outer  side,  the  series  extends 
to  tip  on  the  first,  second  and  third  toes,  about  half  the  length 
of  the  fourth,  and  none  on  the  fifth.  Above  uniform  lavender 
or  blackish  gray,  a  light  stripe  from  below  eye  to  groin  or  on 
tail;  below  on  sides  very  light  grayish,  becoming  lighter  below. 
Snout  to  vent,  124  mm.  (Territory  south  of  the  Caspian  Sea. 
Transcaspia,  northern  and  eastern  Persia.) 

Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald),   138 

EE.  Plates  on  lower  eyelid  small,  scarcely  higher  than  wide;  66 
scales  occiput  to  above  anus;  15  scales  about" forearm:  24  about 
femur;  24  scales  about  middle  of  body;  pre-  and  postsubocular 
scales  continuous;  109  subcaudals;  subocular  as  high  as  wide, 
larger  than  preceding  labials;  posterior  loreal  not  much  longer 
than  high;  on  inner  side  of  fingers  one  or  no  intercalated  scales; 
on  outer  side  same  save  on  thumb,  where  series  extends  to  tip; 
on  inner  side  of  toes  only  one  or  two  intercalated  scales  at  base; 
on  outer  side  the  series  extends  about  half  the  length  of  first  and 
second  toes;  only  one  or  two  at  base  of  third  and  fourth.  Above 
brown  or  olive,  the  median  scale  rows  a  shade  darker;  light  spots 
on  alternate  scales  of  median  rows  extending  onto  tail;  very  dim 
dorsolateral  lines;  a  slightly  darker  lateral  band  bounded  below 
by  a  cream  stripe  from  below  eye;  very  light  gray  low  on  sides; 
below  whitish;  hind  leg  with  numerous  spots;  a  few  scattered 
spots  in  the  dorsolateral  region,  or  nearly  uniform  olive  or  brown 
(golden).  Snout  to  vent,  170  mm.  (Syria,  Arabia,  Persia,  Meso- 
potamia, Cyprus,  Egypt.  Tripoli,  Tunis  and  eastern  Algeria.) 

Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin),   12  1 


126  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin) 

(Plates  6,  10;  Fig.  1;  Figs.  11,  1) 

SYNONYMY 

(Many  of  these  titles  may  actually  refer  to  species  other  than  schneiderii.) 
1800.    Lacerta  scincus   (non   L.)   Georgi.      Geogr.   Phys.   Beschr.   Russ.   Reich.,   T.    3,   Bd.   VI, 

1800,    p.    1876    (Kura);     Hohenacker,    Bull.    Nat.    Moscow,    1831,    p.    365    (Caucasus) 

(possibly  princeps   [Eichwald]). 
1802.    Scincus  schneiderii  Daudin.     Hist.    Rept.,   IV,   1802,   p.    291    (type  locality  not  given; 

presumably  Egypt;    I.  Geoffroy-St.   Hillaire,  Desc.  Egypt,   Nat.  Hist.,  I,  1827,  p.   135, 

pi.   Ill,  fig.   3   (locality  not  given ;    presumably  Egypt ;    and  figure  probably  from  type 

specimen). 
1802.    Lacerta    nafescens    Shaw    (part.).      Gen.    Zo61.,    Ill,    1802,    pp.    285-286    (pale    rufous 

brown    with    a   pale    stripe ;    apparently   based    on    Seba's    figure.      Arabia   and    Egypt, 

Cyprus.). 
1820.    Scincus  cepedii  Merrem.     Syst.  Amph.,   1820,  pp.   71-74. 
1829.    Scincus  cyprius  Cuvier.     Reg.  Anim.,  nouv.  Ed.,  II,  1829,  p.   62. 

1831.  Tiliqua  cyprinus  Gray.     Syn.  Griffith's  Anim.  King.,  IX,  1831,  p.  68   (Egypt). 

1832.  ?  Scincus  officinalis  (non  Laur.)  Dwigubuski,  Mem.  Soc.  Nat.  Moscow,  1832,  p.  15, 
fig.   4   (In  Russ.). 

1839.  Plestiodon  aldrovandii  (part.)  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  p.  701 
(Egypt  and  north  Africa)  (includes  type  of  Eumeces  schneiderii  Daudin) ;  Guichenot, 
Expl.  Sc.  Alger.  Sc.  Phys.  Zool.,  1850,  p.  17;  Dumeril  and  Dumeril,  Cat.  Meth.  Coll. 
Rept.  Mus.  d'Hist.  Nat.,  Paris,  1851,  Paris,  p.  164;  De  Filippi,  Viagg.  in  Persia, 
18G5,  p.  354;  Steindachner,  in  TJnger  and  Kolschy's  Insel  Cypern,  1865,  p.  573;  Gasco, 
Viagg.  Egitto,  pt.  II,  1876,  p.  109;  Lortet,  Arch.  Mus.  Hist.  Nat.  Lyons,  III,  1883, 
p.   187. 

1845.  Plestiodon  auratus  (part.)  Gray.  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  1845,  p.  91  (N.  Africa); 
GUnther,  Proc.  Zool.   Soc.  London,  1864,  p.   489   (Dead  Sea). 

1864.  Eumeces  pavimentatus  Peters.  Mon.  Berl.  Ak.,  1864,  pp.  48,  51;  Anderson,  Proc. 
Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  1871,  p.  180;  Stoliczka,  Journ.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  1872,  p.  121; 
Blanford,  East  Persia,  Zool.  Geol.,  II,  1872,  pp.  387-388  (Pishin,  Baluchistan;  Sarjan, 
S.  W.  Karman,  Southern  Persia ;  Niriz,  East  of  Shiraz) ;  Boettger,  In  Radde,  Faun. 
Flora  S.  W.  Caspian  Geb.,  1886,  p.  57;  and  Zeits.  Ges.  Nat.  (Geibel),  1877,  p.  288; 
and  Ber.  Senck.  Nat.  Ges.  1879-'80,  p.  183;  Kessler,  Trans.  St.  Petersb.  Soc.  Nat., 
VII,  1878,  Suppl.,  p.  177  (Transcaucasian  Region);  Bedriaga,  Bull.  Soc.  Imp.  Nat. 
Moscow,    1879,   No.    3,    p.    27;    Tristram,    West   Palestine,    Rept.    Batr.,    1884,   p.    152. 

1864.    Mabouia  aurata  Giinther.     Rept.  Brit.  India,  1864,  p.  82  (Persia). 

1883.    Eumeces  pavimentatus   syriaca   Boettger.      Abh.    Senck.    Nat.    Ges.,   XII,    1883,   p.    120. 

1883.    Plestiodon  pavimentatus  Lortet.     Arch.  Mus.  Hist.  Nat.  Lyon,  III,  1883,  p.   187. 

1887.  Eumeces  schneiderii  Boulenger.  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  383  (Dead  Sea, 
Jerusalem,  Palestine;  Kirind,  Persia,  Shore  Kelegar) ;  Boettger,  Zool.  Jahrb.,  Bd.  Ill, 
'Syst.,  1888,  p.  918;  Boulenger,  Trans.  Linn.  Soc.  Zool.,  V,  1889,  p.  101;  Fauna  Brit. 
India,  Rept.  Batr.,  1890,  p.  219;  Boettger,  Ber.  Senck.  Ges.,  1892,  p.  147  (Posten 
Bartas,  Caucasus);  Anderson,  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1892,  p.  16  (Duirat,  Tunesia)  ; 
Boettger,  Cat.  Rept.  Samml.  Mus.  Senckenb.  Nat.  Ges.,  I,  1893,  p.  Ill  ("Sarona  bei 
Jaffa,"  Jerusalem,  Syria;  Kopet-dagh,  Transcaspia ;  Gabes,  Tunis);  Peracca,  Boll. 
Mus.  Torino,  IX,  1894,  No.  167,  p.  9  (Es-salt  and  Dscherasch);  Olivier,  Mem.  Soc. 
Zool.  France,  VII,  1894,  p.  114;  Boulenger,  Trans.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1895,  p.  136 
(Cherb  Berrania,  Matmata,  Wed  Kebiriti  [North  of  Chott  Fejej]  and  Gafsa) ;  Ander- 
son, Contrib.  Herp.  Arabia,  with  Prelim,  list  Rept.  Batr.  Egypt,  1896,  p.  104  (Marsa 
Matru;  Maryut  district,  Egypt);  Boettger,  Jahr.  Natur.  ver.  Madgeburg  (1896-1897), 
1898,  pp.  1-22  (Syria);  Anderson,  Zool.  Egypt,  Rept.  Batr.,  1898,  pp.  196-199, 
pi.  XXV  (Egypt.  Excellent  plate);  Boettger,  in  Radde,  Mus.  Cauc,  1899,  p.  282; 
Nikolski,  Ann.  du  Mus.  Zool.,  IV,  1899,  p.  399  (Gerri  Schotur  in  Chascht-Adno.) ; 
Nikolski,  Herp.  Turan.,  1899,  p.  44;  Domergue,  Soc.  Geog.  d'Arch.  Prov.  Oran,  XX, 
1900,  pp.  269-272  ("Sahara,  Tuneslen");  Nikolski,  Mem.  lAead.  Imp.  Si.  St.  Peters- 
bourg,  VIII  Ser.,  Vol.  XVII,  No.  1,  1905,  pp.  185-187  (Caucasus;  Dshulfi  near  R. 
Arax;  Baku;  Beirut;  Achal-tieke;  Aul  Aber  [Astrabad]  ;  Karatay;  Balaschuan ;  Syria; 
Elisabethpol ;  Gululi-Dagh;  Suljukli;  Nuratin,  Western  Bukara ;  Samarkand;  Pales- 
tine; Kerak,  Moawia.);   Annandale,  Journ.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  New  Ser.,  I,  1905.  p.  150 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  127 

(Baluchistan);  Nikolski,  Herp.  Caucasica,  1913,  pp.  110-112;  Faun.  Ross.,  I,  1915, 
p.  508  (Numerous  localities');  Werner,  Verh.  K.  K.  Zool.-Bot.  ties.  Wien.,  Jahr.  1917, 
pp.  191-220  (Prow  Fare,  Persia);  Mertens,  Senckenb.,  Bd.  2,  Heft  6,  1920,  pp.  176- 
179;  Sachs,  Bliitt.  Aquar-Terr.,  XXIX,  1918,  pp.  281-282;  Wolter,  Blatt.  Aquar- 
Terr.,  XXX,  1919,  pp.  15,  339,  353;  idem,  XXIX,  1918,  ]>.  290;  Calabresi,  Boll. 
Mus.  Zool.  Anat.  Comp.  Univ.  Torino,  38,  N.  S.  No.  7,  1923,  pp.  4,  20  (Bengasi, 
Tobvuk,  Arenaica);  Ingoldsby  and  Proctor,  Journ.  Bombay  Nat.  Hist.  Soc,  XXIX, 
Apr.  2o.  1923,  pp.  126,  127  (Kiighi,  Jandola  Ko1  Kai,  Sarwekai  Wana  in  Waziristan, 
Persia);  Czernov,  Bull.  Sci.  l'lnst.  Expl.  Reg.  Caucase  du  Nord,  V,  No.  1,  1926,  p.  64 
Erivani  Ordubar,  Caucasus);  Wetstein,  Sitz.  Kais.  Akad.  Wiss.  Wien.,  Vol.  137,  Heft 
10,  192S,  p.  7S3;  Werner,  Sitz.  Kais.  Akad.  Wiss.  Wien.,  Vol.  13S,  Rd.  1,  Heft  2, 
1929,  p.  19. 

1914.  Eumeces  schneiderii  syriacus  Barbour.  Proc.  New  England  Zool.  Club,  V,  Dec.  2, 
1"I4,  p.  St!  (Petra,  Arabia);    Mertens,  Senckenb.,  Bd.  IV,  Heft.  6,  1922,  p.   176. 

1924.  Eumeces  schneiderii  princeps  Mertens.  Abh.  Bit.  Mus.  Nat.  Heimat.  Nat.  ver. 
Madgeburg,  Bd.  Ill,  Heft.  4,  1924,  pp.  284-286,  pi.  XII,  fig.   4. 

1924.  Eumeces  schneiderii  cyprius  Mertens.  Senckenb.,  Bd.  VI,  Heft.  5-6,  Nov.  1,  1924, 
p.  183. 

1924.  Eumeces  schneiderii  schneiderii  Mertens.  Senckenb.,  Bd.  VI,  Nov.  1,  1924,  pp.  182- 
183. 

History.  The  history  of  this  form  is  given  under  the  discussion 
of  the  group. 

Diagnosis.  A  very  large  species;  generally  gray-olive  above;  two 
rows  of  irregular  cream  spots  on  the  two  median  scale  rows;  a  well- 
defined  cream-colored  line  from  the  sixth  labial,  passing  through 
ear  and  on  sides  above  the  legs  to  some  distance  on  the  tail;  two 
scale  rows  above  the  lateral  cream  line  darker  gray-olive;  entire 
ventral  surface  dull  cream. 

Upper  labials,  eight;  lower  secondary  temporal  larger  than  upper; 
nostril  above  the  rostrolabial  suture;  two  loreals;  two  presuboculars. 
The  seventh  labial  separated  from  the  ear  by  three  pairs  of  post- 
labials;  three  much  enlarged  auricular  lobules;  prefrontals  in  con- 
tact; four  supraoculars,  three  touching  the  frontal;  four  pairs  of 
nuchals;  66  scales  from  parietals  to  above  vent;  24  scale  rows 
around  middle  of  body,  the  median  dorsal  rows  much  larger  than 
other  scales  on  the  body;  three  chinshields;  the  postgenial  scarcely 
differentiated;  median  preanals  enlarged,  overlapping  smaller  outer 
preanals;  a  well-defined  area  of  small  granular  scales  lateral  to 
the  anus,  behind  the  leg  forming  a  fold  or  pocket;  limbs  widely 
separated  when  adpressed. 

Description.  (From  No.  6521,  E.H.T.  collection;  Haiffa,  Syria.) 
Rostral  high,  narrow,  part  visible  above  approaching  the  size  of 
the  frontonasal,  or  larger ;  supranasals  are  a  little  longer  than  wide, 
forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal  small,  not  or  only  a  little 
larger  than  the  prefrontals,  in  contact  laterally  with  the  anterior 
loreal;  prefrontals  pentagonal,  forming  a  median  suture  (partly 
fused  in  this  specimen)  ;  frontal  much  longer  than  its  distance  from 


128 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


the  tip  of  the  snout,  the  sides  constricted  in  the  posterior  third, 
then  widening;  frontoparietals  pentagonal,  forming  a  median  suture, 
about  the  same  area  as  the  prefrontals;  interparietal  small,  short, 
little  larger  than  the  frontoparietal;  parietals  large,  angular,  almost 
inclosing  the  interparietal;  four  pairs  of  slender  nuchals. 

Nasal  quadrangular,  nearly  as  long  as  high,  the  scale  divided 
wholly  or  partially  by  two  grooves  from  nostril,  one  to  the  supra- 
nasal,  the  other  to  the  rostral;  nasal  touching  two  labials,  the 
nostril  above  the  rostrolabial  suture;  anterior  loreal  higher  than 
wide,  much  higher  than  the  posterior  loreal;  no  postnasal;  normally 


Fig.  11.  Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin).  E.H.T.  No.  6521;  Haiffa, 
Syria.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head 
length,  24  mm.;  width,  23  mm. 

two  presuboculars  (on  one  side  one  scale  is  abnormal,  being  broken 
into  five  parts)  forming  a  continuous  series,  below  the  eye,  with 
the  postsubocular  series,  of  which  there  are  seven;  a  preocular, 
followed  by  two  or  three  smaller  scales,  and  these  by  three  rows  of 
granular  scales  extending  to  posterior  corner  of  the  eye,  separating 
the  upper  palpebral  scales  from  the  superciliary  series;  six  super- 
ciliaries,  the  anterior  very  large,  more  than  two  and  one  half  times 
the  size  of  the  last  superciliary,  and  of  nearly  same  area  as  the 
first  supraocular;  two  small  postoculars;  three  or  four  small  scales 
on  lower  eyelid  touching  lower  palpebral,  and  separated  from  the 
pre-  and  postsubocular  series  by  about  five  rows  of  granules;  four 
supraoculars,  three  in  contact  with  the  lower  secondary  temporal, 
which  is  very  large,  its  posterior  margin  vertical,  much  larger  than 
the  upper  secondary  temporal,  which  is  somewhat  wider  posteriorly 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Evmeces  129 

than  anteriorly;  tertiary  temporal  present,  separated  from  ear  by 
three  scales,  from  the  upper  secondary  temporal  by  a  small  un- 
differentiated scale  that  might  be  considered  a  second  tertiary 
temporal. 

Eight  upper  labials,  the  first  smallest,  trapezoidal;  subocular 
labial  longer  than  high;  last  (eighth)  largest,  but  not  as  high  as  the 
seventh  labial;  last  labial  separated  from  the  ear  by  about  three 
pairs  of  scales,  which  arc  somewhat  irregular,  occupying  a  space 
equal  to  the  length  of  the  seventh  labial;  three  large,  and  one 
smaller,  toothlike  preauricular  lobules  as  long  as  the  width  of  the  ear. 

Mental  normally  with  about  the  same  labial  extent  as  rostral; 
two  postmentals,  the  anterior  very  small;  three  pairs  of  irregular 
chinshields,  the  first  pair  in  contact,  the  third  pair  widely  separated ; 
postgenial  scales  following  not  or  scarcely  differentiated;  eight 
lower  labials. 

Scale  rows  parallel;  median  pair  widened,  more  than  two  and 
one  fourth  times  as  wide  as  deep.  Scales  about  the  ear,  about 
twenty-four;  27  rows  about  neck;  30  rows  around  body  in  axillary 
region;  24  about  middle  of  body;  preanal  scales  eight,  the  median 
greatly  enlarged,  overlapping  the  outer  preanals,  which  diminish  in 
size  laterally;  subcaudals  much  widened  (100  in  tail  that  has  been 
reproduced) ;  a  small  differentiated  scale,  with  a  raised  rounded 
surface,  near  posterior  lateral  border  of  anus;  legs  short,  strong; 
18  scales  about  insertion  of  arm;  numerous  granular  scales  in  axilla; 
palm  with  numerous,  somewhat  enlarged,  padlike,  overlapping 
tubercles,  smaller  about  base  of  fingers;  lamellar  formula  for  fin- 
gers: 6;  9;  10;  12;  8;  about  25  scales  about  insertion  of  leg;  heel 
bordered  by  a  series  of  enlarged  plates,  preceded  by  three  or  four 
enlarged  scales;  sole  covered  with  subequal  granules;  lamellar  for- 
mula for  toes:  5;  10;  13;  16;  10.  Terminal  lamellae  enlarged 
above  and  below,  not  binding  base  of  claw;  no  intercalated  series, 
the  toes  and  fingers  with  only  a  dorsal  and  ventral  series  of  scales; 
pits  on  scales,  if  ever  present,  have  become  entirely  obsolete. 

Body  much  elongated,  the  limbs  separated  by  a  distance  equal  to 
the  length  of  six  lateral  scales.  The  body  appears  quadrangular  in 
cross  section  and  the  tail  likewise,  the  depth  of  the  tail  being  a 
little  greater  than  its  width. 

Color  in  alcohol.  This  very  well  preserved  specimen  is  of  gray- 
olive  color  above;  the  two  median  rows  are  darker  than  the  two 
adjoining  (second  and  third)  while  the  fourth  and  fifth  are  slightly 
darker  gray-olive  than  the  median  pair;  the  cream  spots  on  the 

9—1123 


i::n 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


CM 

m< 

^OM 

lO 

-*      m     <n      os     oo     - 

h       OS       lO       CO       oo       >o       -h 

■o 

CS 

1-1            ^H            01            1-1 

i-H        CM 

rt 

I-l  OS 

§ 

IN        10) 

© 

"!o 

OS 

tO          Ifl          N           r 

H          ©           1- 

1       OS       CO       lO       os       »o       ^h 

yfe 

lO 

o 

i-H        CM         CO         i-H 

H        CM 

rt 

gos 

"5 

•  oo 

■* 

m 

00       ©       ©       CM       iO 

CD 

i-H 

CM 

H        CM        i- 

S2 

<i 

oo 

lO 

iO 

«eo 

t^ 

©©©©TtlCMCSTjiOSOO© 

Q© 

y  00 

*-l  OS 

oo 

^H           Ol          rt<           i- 

1        rH        iH        CO        iH 

rt 

<5 

Nw 

CO 

<oooscsooco-*'oscO'-ir~ 

yS 

OS 

I- 

i-i        CM        O        --I        i-H        CI        CO        i-H        i-h        --I 

gos 

lO 

lO 

la 

-3 

3 

«os 

OS 

OS       i-H       OS       00       00       >o       lO       O       CO       CM       o 

y£ 

gos 

o 

t-l 

<N£N©i-lrHCM'*t-li- 

i        CM 

o3 

Q 

*1as 
£co 

CO 

Ol 

"5      ©      r^      i-i 

o 

z 

CO 

CM        ^i        _        rt 

w  CM 

<d 

2rH 

re 

<i 

N_ 

o 

0C 

c 

co      oi 

a 

1 

>C        i-l        rjl        OI         © 

<*> 

rj© 
y  oo 

1-* 

c\ 

CO        CC 

1— 

CM      M<      iH       rH      CM 

*—  OS 

CO 

^ 

u- 

3 

NCM     ' 

t^ 

a 

0s 

CO         10 

a 

CC 

CO       i-h       CM       CO       © 

yg 

o 

CO       cc 

i— 

" 

CM            -vtl            1— 1            1— I            1— 1 

&q 

gOs 

*+- 1 

o 

CO 

02 

N^ 

,-H 

o 

CM 

t--         N 

c 

O        CO        1C        tJI        CM. 

■4J 

Q© 

y  oo 

CM 

CN 

co      cc 

CM 

o 

CO        ^i        i-l        i-H        CM 

a 
5 

CD 
M 

03 

i — i 

k-l  OS 
2 

CM 

N!o 

o 

a 

10, 

O),        i- 

C 

c 

CM        ©        »0        CO        © 

O© 

y  oo 

CO 

CN 

Tt<        0C 

O) 

CN 

CO         -sf          rH         i-H         CM 

HOS 

CD 

^ 

S 

No 

-ff 

CI 

■0 

OS       CM 

CO 

CC 

•       O        ©        t- 

og 

tH 

CM 

CO       cc 

OI 

i— 

lO         l-H         .-1 

HI- 

2 

H-, 

o 

o- 

t>     oc 

r* 

co 

•* 

CO        ©        i- 

Wo 

CO 

u: 

Tt 

os 

CM 

CM 

c 

lO        i-l        O. 

i— 1 

IN 

,,■© 

W 

b 

; 

Cp 

c 

T 

-u 

>> 

as 
> 

<D 

as 

S 

as 

'a 

'S 

W 

as 

-a 

CS 

as 
J3 

-a 

•a 
o 

S  k" 

o 

o 

o 

-♦J 

o 

O 

o 

"c 

b 

e, 

CO 

'5 

O 

s.3 

43 

■*^> 

4J 

-^ 

c3 

-*3 

A 

_a 

a 

-u 

J3 

OS^Ci 

3 

3 

3 

d 

em 

"as 

T> 

b 

— 

■•a 

2  S 

c 

i — i 

o 

O 

o 

77h 

a 

T3 

C 

a 

o: 

T3 

P 

3 

cc 

-03 

a 
co 

a 

CO 

a 
co 

OS 

^ 

o 

S 

o 

i-l 

a 
< 

k 

CO 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  131 

two  median  rows  are  near  the  outer  border  and  appear  usually  on 
every  other  scale,  forming  an  irregular  row;  a  few  flecks  on  the 
dorsolateral  scale  rows;  on  the  tail  a  few  appear  on  the  median 
dorsal  rows;  the  lateral  cream  line  from  sixth  labial  spreads  out 
and  includes  the  corner  of  mouth  and  most  of  the  ear  border,  and 
on  the  sides  occupies  all  the  sixth  row  and  the  outer  edge  of  the 
fifth;  below  the  lateral  cream  line,  the  body  is  gray  for  one  or  two 
rows.  Under  surfaces  dirty  cream;  lower  labials  grayish.  Head 
same  as  body.  Hind  limb  with  cream  flecks,  above,  and  somewhat 
brownish  in  the  post  femoral  region.  Tail  somewhat  lighter  than 
body,  becoming  cream  on  the  entire  regenerated  portion  (83  mm.). 

Variation.  A  total  of  17  specimens  have  been  available  in  my 
study  of  this  form  and  they  agree  in  the  main  in  most  essential 
characters. 

In  no  specimen  other  than  the  one  described  are  the  parietals  in 
contact  behind  the  interparietals,  although  only  minutely  separated 
in  one  specimen  (A.M.X.H.  2280). 

In  all  cases  save  one  the  lateral  scales  are  parallel.  This  is  Mich. 
67251.  Abd  El  Kadar,  Lower  Egypt,  and  the  scales  are  arranged  in 
long  diagonal  rows  on  sides.  Scale  rows  about  neck  vary  from 
27  to  30,  29  being  the  usual  number  about  the  narrower  part  of  the 
neck.  The  number  of  scale  rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body  is 
normally  24  (occurring  in  13  specimens) ;  25  occur  once,  and  26 
three  times.  The  number  of  scales  in  a  row  from  occiput  to  above 
anus  is  from  64  to  67,  64  occurring  once,  65  occurring  eight  times, 
66  five  times  and  67  twice  (16  specimens  counted)  ;  subcaudals 
vary  in  four  specimens  with  complete  tails  as  follows:  122,  128, 
130,  131. 

The  upper  labials  are  8-8  in  all  the  specimens  save  a  single  ex- 
ception with  nine.  The  scales  about  the  ear  vary  usually  between 
20  and  22.  Two  specimens  have  25;  nuchals  extremely  variable, 
as  follows:  2-2,  twice;  2-3,  once;  3-3,  twice;  3-4,  once;  4-4  seven 
times;  4-5,  twice;  5-6,  once. 

Supraoculars  invariably  4-4;  the  first  three  touching  the  frontal. 
Two  postmentals  and  no  postnasal  is  invariably  the  case  in  the 
series.  The  seventh  and  eighth  labials  are  often  of  about  the  same 
size;  sometimes  the  eighth  is  definitely  the  larger;  five  is  the  usual 
number  of  labials  preceding  the  suboculars. 

The  nasal  is  distinctly  divided  in  most  of  the  specimens.  The 
lower  part  of  the  suture  is  not  evident  in  one.  The  frontonasal  is 
invariably    broader   than    long.     The    prefrontals    are   invariably 


132  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

broadly  in  contact;  subdigital  lamellae  vary  between  15  and  18,  16 
occurring  most  frequently.  The  pre-  and  postocular  series  are 
continuous  and  the  formula  is  usually  2  +  5  or  rarely  2  +  6,  in  one 
case  each  1  +  6  and  2  +  7. 

Color  variation.  The  following  specimens  show  variation  from 
the  described  specimen.  Mich.  67251  <?  ,  Abed  El  Kadar,  Lower 
Egypt.  Large  specimen,  151mm.  snout  to  vent;  202mm.  tail. 
Above  gray-olive  (the  head  more  brownish),  covering  about  eleven 
scale  rows;  sides  and  underparts  white  or  cream;  faint  gray  spots 
on  lower  jaw,  side  of  neck  and  along  sides;  limbs  light  olive-brown, 
spotted  or  dappled  with  white;  much  white  on  anterior  surface  of 
hind  limb;  back  spotted  with  light,  arranged  in  longitudinal  as  well 
as  transverse  rows  (about  23  of  the  latter) ;  spots  about  size  of 
scales;  last  three  labials  and  postlabials  covered  partly  by  a  large 
cream  spot.  A  slight  striation  is  evident  on  ventral  as  well  as  dorsal 
scales.    Tail  with  dim  annulations. 

No.  37291  U.S.N.M.,  Lower  Egypt.  $  145  mm.  snout  to  vent. 
Tail  regenerated.  Brown  above  with  a  slight  tendency  for  the 
deeper  brown  color  to  form  dim  lines  on  the  scale  edges  except 
along  the  median  line.  There  are  four  of  these  dim,  darker  lines; 
the  most  distinct  borders  the  first  and  second  scale  rows;  the  areas 
between  make  four  very  dim  lighter  lines;  those  on  the  second 
and  third  scale  rows  lightest;  a  white  line  from  subocular  to  ear, 
widening  in  front  of  ear,  but  not  reaching  the  top  of  ear;  bel.md 
ear  the  line  begins  from  lower  half,  follows  along  sides  and  to  u 
considerable  distance  along  tail,  following  fifth  scale  row,  but  not 
covering  it;  below  this  is  a  gray  stripe  that  fades  into  the  cream 
color  of  the  ventral  regions;  two  dim  rows  of  light  spots  on  back, 
the  spots  appearing  on  alternate  scales.  A  few  scattered  light  spots 
on  tail. 

In  the  series  from  Petra,  Arabia,  the  tendency  to  form  transverse 
bands  of  light  spots  is  more  pronounced  than  in  Syrian  or  Egyptian 
specimens.  Their  color  in  life  is  as  follows:  "Rich  bronzy  olive, 
with  scattered  spots,  on  the  dorsal  scales,  of  the  color  of  burnished 
copper,  and  a  light  lateral  stripe  of  lemon-yellow  or  salmon-pink 
on  the  lower  portion  of  the  sides,  and  below  brilliant  glistening 
white,  sometimes  with  a  light  greenish  tinge.  The  young  individuals 
are  very  differently  colored.  The  middorsal  area,  comprising  just 
the  two  rows  of  broad  scales,  is  entirely  unspotted.  On  each  side 
of  this  region  there  are  two  narrow  dark  lines,  and  then  a  wide 
dusky  lateral  band  from  the  neck  region  to  the  groin.     This  is 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  133 

spotted  with  white  scales.  The  lower  regions  of  the  sides,  pure 
white  in  the  adults,  are  mottled  with  dusky  spots."  (Barbour, 
1914.) 

Mr.  II.  W.  Parker  has  submitted  notes  on  British  Museum  speci- 
mens from  Cyprus,  as  follows: 

"Uniform  brownish  above.  A  strong  white  line  from  upper  lip  or  ear  onto 
base  of  tail.  Scales  24  or  26  (6  specs.,  4  with  24  rows).  The  only  specimen 
showing  any  trace  of  the  juvenile  livery  has  a  faintly  darker  middorsal  zone 
the  width  of  the  two  middorsal  scale  rows,  faintly  edged  with  darker  brown. 
This  is  separated  by  a  lighter  dorso-lateral  stripe  from  a  wide  dark  lateral 
stripe  two  scales  wide.  This  is  bordered  below  by  the  strong  white  lateral 
line.  One  adult  shows  a  few  scattered  white  spots  on  the  base  of  the  tail  and 
towards  the  flanks." 

Distribution.  This  form,  as  here  recognized,  extends  apparently 
from  eastern  Algeria  and  Tunis  across  north  Africa  and  into 
western  Asia,  and  on  the  island  of  Cyprus.  The  published  records 
of  the  occurrence  of  this  form  are  not  included,  and  I  am  in  doubt, 
in  many  cases,  as  to  whether  the  various  specimens  listed  belong 
to  this  species. 

Locality  records: 

Egypt:    (Type  locality;  type  formerly  in  the  Paris  Museum);  Lower  Egypt 

(A.M.N.H.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1);  Abd  el  Kadar  (Mich.  1). 
Arabia:    Petra  (M.C.Z.  10)   (A.M.N.H.  2). 
Syria:    Haiffa  (E.H.T.  1);  Mt.  Jerusalem  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Algeria:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Eumeces  pavimentatus  (Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire) 

(Plate  5,  fig.   2;   Figs.  12  and  13) 

SYNONYMY 

(As  has  been  stated,  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  associate  certainly  with  this  form  all  litera- 
ture references  which  apply  to  it ;  some  of  the  titles  listed  under  schneiderii  may  properly 
belong  here.) 

1827.    Scincus    pavimentatus    Is.     Geoffroy-St.     Hillaire.       Descr.     Egypt.     Hist.     Nat.,     1827, 

p.  138,  pi.  IV,  fig.  4. 
1834.    Eumeces  -pavimentatus   Wiegmann.      Herp.    Mex.,    1834,    p.    36;    and   Arch,    fur   Natur., 

I,  2,  1835,  p.  288  (genotype). 
1883.    Eumeces   pavimentatus   var.    syriaca    Boettger.      Abh.    Senck.    Nat.    Ges.,    XIII,    s.    120 

(type  locality  "Sarona  bei  Jaffa,  Syrien,"  G.  Sinion  Coll.,  1881). 
1924.    Eumeces  schneiderii  pavimentatus   Mertens.      Senckenbergiana,   Bd.   VI,   heft   5-6,   Nov. 

1,   1924,  p.   183. 

History.  This  species  appears  first  to  have  been  recognized  by 
Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire  and  his  son,  Isadore,  who  describe  and  figure 
the  form  in  Savigny's  "Description  d'  Egypte"  as  Scincus  pavimen- 
tatus. In  1834  Wiegmann  placed  the  form  under  his  newly  formed 
genus  Eumeces  and  the  following  year  designated  the  species  as  the 
genotype. 


134 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Boettger  (1883)  described  a  form  occurring  in  Syria,  Eumeces 
pavimentatus  syriacus.  Mertens,  who  has  examined  the  type  of 
syriacus,  places  it  as  a  synonym  of  schneiderii  pavimentatus. 

Diagnosis.  One  of  the  Schneiderii  group,  characterized  by  a 
slender,  elongate  body.  General  color  brown  above,  with  a  more  or 
less  well-defined  lateral  line  along  the  side  of  the  body  to  the  groin, 
little  or  no  evidence  of  spots  on  the  labials,  and  the  line  from  the  ear 
to  foreleg  not  widened.  Scale  rows  on  back  with  very  small,  elongated 
white  dots  or  dashes  on  the  middle  of  each  scale,  save  the  two  median 
rows,  where  the  dashes  are  on  every  other  scale.  These  white  marks 
make  a  series  of  eight  dotted  lines  on  the  back.  Scale  rows,  24 
about  body;  two  postmentals;  no  postnasal;  nasal  undivided.  Me- 
dian dorsal  scale  rows  widened. 

Description  of  species  (from  K.  U.  No.  11022,  "Haiffa,  Syria,"  0. 
Tofohr,  collector).  Portion  of  rostral  visible  above  distinctly  larger 
than  the  frontonasal;  supranasals  relatively  small,  in  contact  medi- 
ally; frontonasal  broader  than  long,  in  contact  laterally  with  the 
anterior  loreal;  prefrontals  relatively  very  large,  much  larger  than 
the  frontoparietals,  broadly  in  contact  medially,  the  suture  with  the 
frontal  largest;  frontal  longer  than  its  distance  to  end  of  snout, 
relatively  narrow,  narrower  than  the  supraocular  region;  fronto- 
parietals relatively  small,  forming  a  median  suture;  interparietal 
small,  not  inclosed  by  the  parietals;  four  pairs  of  nuchals. 


Fig.  12.  Distribution  in  Africa  and  Asia  of  Eumeces  schneiderii  (Daudin) , 
E.  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters),  E.  algeriensis  meridionalis  Domergue, 
and  E.  ■pavimentatus  ( Geoff roy-St.Hillaire).  Data  on  E.  schneiderii  and 
E.  pavimentatus  very  incomplete. 


Taylor:     Tin:  (ii:.\rs   Kvmkcks 


135 


Xasal  longer  than  high,  the  scale  with  a  suture  running  from 
supralabial  to  the  nostril,  but  no  suture  is  apparent  from  nostril  to 
the  rostral;  from  lateral  view  nostril  is  directed  straight  in;  no 
postnasal;  anterior  loreal  higher  than  wide,  but  not  or  only  slightly 
higher  than  the  posterior  loreal;  the  latter  only  slightly  longer  than 
high,  and  strongly  differing  in  shape  and  character  from  the  same 
scale  in  schneiderii;  two  large  presuboculars,  more  or  less  continuous 
with  the  seven  postsubocular  scales,  of  which  the  anterior  are  very 


Fig.  13.  Eumeces  pavimentatus  (Geoffroy-St.Hillarie).  K.U.  No.  11022; 
Haiffa,  Syria.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  19.2  mm.;  width,  16  mm.  (The  rostral  extends  more  to  the 
upper  surface  than  is  shown.) 

small,  scarcely  distinguishable  from  granular  scales  of  lower  eyelid; 
six  superciliaries,  the  anterior  twice  as  long  as  wide,  more  than  half 
size  of  the  anterior  supraocular;  last  superciliary  large,  vertically 
placed  (lateral  view),  generally  resembling  a  supraocular,  but 
smaller;  small  triangular  preocular,  two  very  small  postoculars; 
palpebrals  rather  small,  separated  from  superciliaries  by  two  or 
three  rows  of  granular  scales;  lower  eyelid  with  a  series  of  three 
small  plates  only  a  little  larger  than  granular  scales,  which  are 
separated  from  the  pre-  and  postsubocular  series  by  four  or  five 
granular  scale  rows.  Primary  temporal  about  as  large  as  the  largest 
labial,  the  main  axis  vertical  (in  lateral  view)  ;  upper  secondary 
relatively  small,  narrow,  twice  as  long  as  its  greatest  width;  lower 
secondary  very  large,  its  main  axis  vertical ;  the  tertiary  temporal 
vertical,  separated  from  the  upper  secondary  by  a  scale,  from  ear 
opening  by  three  scales;  upper  labials  eight,  the  first  smallest,  the 


136  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

rostrolabial  suture  directly  below  nostril;  the  first  two  labials  in 
contact  with  nasal;  five  labials  preceding  the  subocular  labial,  which 
is  as  high  as  long;  seventh  labial  larger  and  higher  than  eighth; 
latter  scale  only  a  little  longer  than  high,  separated  from  auricular 
opening  by  a  distance  greater  than  its  length ;  three  pairs  of  post- 
labials,  diminishing  in  size;  four  well-developed,  sharply  denticulate 
lobules  in  front  of  ear,  directed  backwards;  24-26  scales  around 
ear;  mental  with  a  labial  border  equal  to  that  of  rostral;  two  well- 
developed  postmental  shields,  followed  by  three  pairs  of  chinshields, 
none  of  which  are  in  contact;  postgenial  small,  bordered  on  the  inner 
side  by  a  scale  of  equal  size  and  shape;  seven  lower  labials. 

Scale  rows  generally  parallel,  in  24  rows  about  the  middle  of 
body;  33  scales  about  neck  behind  ear;  27-28  on  narrower  part  of 
neck;  about  19  scales  around  base  of  tail;  two  median  dorsal  rows 
widened,  the  rows  low  on  sides  smallest;  eight  scales  border  the 
anus,  the  median  pair  enlarged,  the  median  scales  overlapping  the 
adjoining  outer  scales;  lateral  postanal  scale  strongly  differentiated, 
rounded  and  raised;  subcaudals  much  widened;  tail  vertically  com- 
pressed; seventeen  scales  about  arm  at  insertion;  an  area  of  small 
imbricating  scales  in  the  axilla;  no  well-defined  outer  wrist  tubercle; 
numerous  large  padlike  tubercles  on  base  of  palm,  the  tubercles 
growing  smaller  towards  base  of  digits;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers: 
6;  9;  11;  10;  7;  the  intercalated  scales  on  fingers  are  on  base  only, 
save  on  the  second  finger,  where  a  series  extends  to  claw  between 
upper  and  lower  scales  on  the  outer  side  of  digit;  about  25  scales 
around  leg  at  insertion;  behind  insertion  of  limb  numerous  small 
scales;  when  the  legs  are  moved  back  a  small  pocket  is  formed 
on  each  side  of  the  anus.  In  the  middle  of  heel  two  enlarged  plates ; 
the  scales  on  under  surface  of  foot  conical,  slightly  juxtaposed  or 
slightly  imbricating.  Lamellar  formula  for  toes:  6;  9;  9;  16;  9; 
toes  covered  generally  by  two  rows  of  scales  save  on  outer  side  of 
the  three  inner  toes,  where  there  is  an  intercalated  row  of  scales 
extending  completely  or  almost  to  claw ;  one  or  two  at  base  of  other 
toes. 

Color.  Above  brown  to  amber-brown,  the  color  varying  in  in- 
tensity; the  brown  color  is  more  intense  on  outer  edges  of  the  two 
median  scale  rows,  and  gives  the  impression  of  two  dim,  darker 
lines  separated  by  a  median  that  is  somewhat  lighter,  with  each 
darker  line  bounded  laterally  by  a  slightly  lighter  stripe;  a  narrow, 
more  or  less  distinct  cream  or  white  lateral  stripe,  not  evident 
anterior  to  ear;  below  this  a  brownish-gray  stripe  fading  into  the 
ground  color  of  the  ventral  surfaces. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


137 


On  the  back  one  notes  two  series  of  lighter  markings.  On  the 
first  and  third  scale  rows  are  very  dim  lighter  markings  on  the 
outer  half  (or  third)  of  alternate  scales,  while  on  the  third  row  the 
spots  may  be  the  size  of  the  scale  on  alternate  scales.  These  are 
only  dimly  visible  (more  distinct  in  K.  U.  11021).  Aside  from  this 
series  of  markings  are  series  of  small  white  dots  and  dashes  which 
form  dotted  lines  on  each  of  the  eight  dorsal  scale  rows,  the  dots 
on  the  median  scale  rows  on  every  other  scale,  those  on  others  on 
each  scale;  these  flecks  continued  to  near  tip  of  tail,  but  here  they 
are  more  scattered  and  suggest  dim  ambulations,  the  scales  bear- 
ing the  dots  likewise  being  browner  than  adjoining  scales. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  pavimeiitatus  (Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire) 


Museum. . 
Number! 
Sex 


K.U. 

11021 

K.U. 
11022 

9 

136 

134 

209* 

I45f 

9 

9.2 

22 

22 

42 

43 

80 

85 

17.5 

16 

21 

19.2 

17 

20 

14 

12 

35 

33 

59 

54 

19.5 

18 

A.N.S.P. 

9661 

? 


Snout  to  vent 

Tail 

Snout  to  eye 

Snout  to  ear 

Snout  to  foreleg .  .  . 

Axilla  to  groin 

Width  of  head 

Length  of  head .... 
Width  of  body .... 
Postanal  tail  width. 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Longest  toe 


79 
148 
6.3 
16.6 
24 
46 
11.8 
14 


8 
22 
31.6 

11 


*  Broken,     f  Regenerated,     fl  Nos.   11021,  11022,   "Haiffa,  Syria";    9661,  unknown  locality. 

Variation.  Only  three  specimens  have  been  available  for  exam- 
ination, and  two  agree  quite  remarkably  in  markings  and  scale 
characters.  A  few  variations,  however,  are  evident:  superciliaries 
7-7,  6-6  and  5-5;  lamellae  under  fourth  toe  13-14,  16-16,  15-16; 
scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus  66,  66,  68.  In  coloration  but 
little  difference  is  noted.  The  smaller  specimen  has  the  head 
covered  above  with  white  dots,  only  dimly  evident  in  the  adults; 
there  is  a  suggestion  of  vertical  lines  behind  the  ear.  A  curious 
anomally  occurs  in  this  smaller  specimen.  The  frontoparietals 
are  completely  wanting,  apparently  fused  with  the  adjoining  scales. 
In  this  specimen,  too,  the  first  pair  of  chinshields  are  in  contact 


138  '  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

and  the  postgenial  is  proportionally  larger  than  the  adjoining  scale. 
There  are  126  subcaudal  scales  in  the  complete  tail. 

Remarks.  This  form  differs  from  the  typical  schneiderii  in  a 
more  slender  head  and  body;  with  a  proportionally  longer  hind  leg; 
the  limbs  touching  when  adpressed  or,  in  younger  specimens, 
strongly  overlapping  (in  A.N.S.P.  No.  9661  they  overlap  the  width 
of  nine  scales).  The  nasal  is  apparently  not  completely  divided 
and  the  first  pair  of  chinshields  are  not  in  contact  medially.  The 
markings  and  color  are  not  distinctive. 

Distribution.  This  species  is  probably  confined  to  Egypt,  Syria 
and  closely  adjacent  territory,  and  it  appears  to  overlap  territory 
occupied  by  certain  other  forms  of  the  group. 

Locality  records: 

Syria:    "Haiffa"  (K.U.  2) ;  Sarona  near  Jaffa  (Senckenberg  2). 
Egypt:    (Geoffroy-St.  Hillaire  type;  present  location  of  type  uncertain). 

Eumcces  princeps  (Eichwald) 

(Plate  3,  fig.  3;    Figs.   10,   14) 
SYNONYMY 

1839.  Euprepes  princeps  Eichwald.  Bull.  Soc.  Imp.  Nat.  Moscow,  II,  1839,  pp.  303-307 
(type  locality  "In  ora  Caspia  occidentali,  ad  montes  praesertim  Talyschensis" ;  type 
probably  in  Moscow);  and  Faun.  Caspia-Cauc,  1841,  pp.  93,  116,  pi.  XVI,  figs.  1, 
2,  3;  Severtzoff,  Nacht.  Ges.  Moscow,  VIII,  pt.  2,  1873,  p.  72;  Nikolsky,  Trans. 
St.  Peters.  Nat,  Soc,  XVII,  1886,  p.  406;  Zarudny,  Bull.  Soc.  Imp.  Nat.  Moscow, 
1890,  p.   295  (Murgab,  Tedjent  in  oases  of  Merve  and  Peunde). 

(The  association  of  further  references  to  the  synonymy  of  this  species  must  needs  await 
an  examination  of  the  materials  on  which  the  records  were  made.  Mere  geographical  prob- 
ability will  not  suffice  as  a  basis,  inasmuch  as  there  is  likelihood  that  the  territories  occupied 
by  certain  forms  overlap,  nor  will  the  meager  details  published  suffice.) 

History.  This  species  was  very  early  referred  to  synonymy  either 
under  the  name  Eumeces  schneiderii  or  Eumeces  pavimentatus, 
being  used  only  by  certain  Russian  authors.  It  was  revived  by 
Mertens  in  1924,  but  it  is  doubtful  that  the  forms  associated  under 
it  actually  belong  to  Eichwald's  species.  In  the  same  year  Mertens 
placed  the  name  in  the  synonymy  of  Eumeces  schneiderii  schneiderii 
(Daudin). 

Diagnosis.  Above  nearly  uniformly  brownish  slate  to  lavender, 
the  scales  showing  some  scattered  gray  flecks.  An  indistinct,  narrow, 
lateral  cream  line  beginning  on  the  posterior  labials  can  be  traced 
through  the  ear  and  along  the  sides  to  the  groin  on  the  sixth  and 
seventh  scale  rows;  below  this  line,  grayish,  becoming  somewhat 
lighter  below.  Tail  above  lighter  than  body ;  mental  with  distinctly 
wider  labial  border  than  rostral;  presuboculars  elongate  and  very 
narrow. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


l:!!) 


Description  of  species  (from  K.U.  No.  11020,  Transcaspia  $  ). 
Rostral  high,  extending  as  far  back  on  the  snout  as  a  line  connecting 
the  middle  of  the  nasals;  the  part  visible  above  equally  as  large  as 
the  frontonasal;  supranasals  moderately  large,  in  contact  medially 
for  half  their  width;  frontonasal  much  wider  than  dee]),  touching 
the  anterior  loreals;  prefrontals  large,  much  larger  than  the  fronto- 
parietals; frontal  narrow,  a  little  longer  than  its  distance  from  the 
end  of  the  snout  (in  pavimentatus  much  longer  [.5  mm.  to  2.3  mm.]), 
the  anterior  angles  more  obtuse  than  in  pavimentatus;  fronto- 
parietals in  contact  rather  narrowly,  the  transverse  width  as  great 


Fig.  14.  Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald).  K.U.  No.  11020;  Transcaspia. 
A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length,  18.2 
mm.;  width,  15  mm. 

as  the  length  (longer  than  wide  in  pavimentatus) ;  interparietal 
rather  large,  with  as  great  a  length  as  the  parietals ;  parietals  large, 
very  wide;  four  pairs  of  narrow,  widened  nuchals. 

Nasal  large,  divided  by  sutures,  one  from  rostral  to  nostril,  and 
one  from  supranasal  to  the  nostril,  the  upper  moiety  nearly  twice 
as  large  as  that  in  pavimentatus;  no  postnasal;  anterior  loreal 
higher  than  posterior;  the  latter  much  longer  than  high,  the  upper 
edge  horizontal,  much  narrowed  posteriorly;  preocular  small;  pre- 
suboculars  relatively  elongated  and  narrow;  seven  superciliaries, 
the  anterior  larger  than  posterior;  palpebral  scales  separated  from 
middle  superciliaries  by  a  row  of  scales  as  large  as  or  larger  than 
palpebrals;  and  anteriorly  and  posteriorly  by  a  second  series  which 
is  inconspicuous  medially;  four  large  plates  on  lower  eyelid  (much 
more  elongate  than  in  pavimentatus) ,  separated  from  the  subocular 


140  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

by  five  scale  rows;  seven  postsuboculars,  which  reach  to  the  pre- 
suboculars,  forming  an  unequal  but  practically  continuous  series; 
two  small  postoculars;  four  supraoculars. 

Primary  temporal  very  distinctly  smaller  than  in  pavimentatus, 
its  area  less  than  half  the  upper  secondary  temporal;  lower  second- 
ary temporal  moderately  large,  with  an  area  not  or  only  slightly 
larger  than  that  of  upper  secondary,  and  much  higher  than  long; 
tertiary  temporal  narrow,  high,  separated  from  the  upper  secondary 
by  a  scale,  from  the  ear  lobules  by  one  vertically  elongate  scale 
and  one  smaller  scale  (in  pavimentatus  by  three  or  four  scales) . 

Eight  upper  labials,  first  smallest,  seventh  highest,  its  area  about 
equal  to  that  of  eighth;  eighth  labial  separated  from  the  ear  lobules 
by  about  four  rather  irregular  scales,  the  lower  scale  in  contact  with 
the  labial  largest;  mental  with  a  labial  border  much  greater  than 
that  of  rostral;  two  postmentals  (the  posterior  broken  on  right  side; 
the  part  broken  is  fused  with  the  first  chinshield)  ;  normal  chin- 
shields  on  right  side  three,  the  second  narrower  and  much  broader 
than  other  two;  the  postgenial  smaller  and  shorter  than  scale  bor- 
dering it  on  its  inner  side  and  likewise  in  contact  with  the  third 
chinshield;  five  or  six  lower  labials;  ear  opening  with  four  large 
lobules,  their  bases  strongly  overlapping ;  about  22  scales  around  ear. 

The  scales  on  sides  of  body  slightly  diagonal  in  axillary  region, 
but  parallel  farther  back;  the  scales  of  the  two  median  rows  much 
wider  than  the  adjoining,  which  in  turn  are  larger  than  the  third 
row;  scales  on  side  much  smaller  than  the  dorsal  scales  or  ventral 
scales;  28  scale  rows  around  narrow  part  of  neck;  34  in  axillary 
region;  26  about  middle  of  body;  20  about  base  of  tail  at  first 
widened  subcaudal. 

Eight  anal  plates;  the  median  pair  very  large,  overlapping  outer 
scales,  and  each  in  turn  overlapping  the  scale  touching  its  outer 
border;  a  group  of  small  granular  scales  in  the  axilla;  a  group  of 
granules  posterior  to  the  insertion  of  the  hind  limb,  extending  to 
the  sides  of  anus,  and  when  leg  is  pulled  back,  a  small  pocket  is 
formed  beside  the  anus;  lateral  postanal  in  female  large  and  fairly 
well  differentiated  (probably  much  more  so  in  male)  ;  64  scales 
from  parietal  to  above  anus;  110  -f-  subcaudals  (tip  of  tail  missing 
and  probably  five  to  eight  subcaudals). 

Body  slender,  elongate;  limbs  well-developed,  overlapping  but 
slightly  when  adpressed;  digits  with  terminal  lamellae  not  tightly 
bound  about  claw;  palm  with  a  series  of  larger  scales  diminishing 
in  size  distally,  separated  from  bases  of  digits  by  several  series  of 


Taylor:    The  (Ikxis   Kimkcks 


141 


small  granules;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  5;  8;  10;  12;  6.  Claws 
very  long  (perhaps  due  to  captivity)  ;  heel  plates  forming  an  un- 
broken series  from  basal  lamellae  of  inner  toe  around  to  base  of 
outer  toe;  scales  on  sole  only  slightly  enlarged;  lamellar  formula 
for  toes:    5;  8;  10;  14;  9. 

An  intercalated  series  of  scales  between  the  dorsal  scales  and  the 
ventral  lamellae  of  toes,  on  the  outer  side  of  the  first  and  second 
toes,  and  the  inner  side  of  the  fifth  toe;  on  third  and  fourth  toes 
they  arc  on  the  basal  part  of  the  outer  side  only;  on  the  first, 
second  and  third  toes  the  intercalated  scales  extend  the  length  of 
the  toes  on  the  outer  side;  on  the  fourth  they  are  absent  only  on 
distal  phalanx,  and  are  present  on  the  inner  side  of  the  fifth. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  As  in  diagnosis.  Limbs  much  browner  and 
lighter  than  dorsal  color  of  body;  the  tail  gradually  becoming 
lighter  toward  tip;  ear  lobules  light;  upper  labials  light  brownish 
on  lower  part,  dark  slate  on  upper  part;  the  supraocular  region 
lighter  than  the  median  region  of  the  head. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  princeps  (Eichwald) 


Museum 

KIT. 

Number 

11020 

Snout  to  vent                     

125 

Tail 

193* 

Snout  to  eye    .                            

7.5 

22 

Snout  to  foreleg        

35 

75 

18.2 

Width  of  head  .                                 

15 

Foreleg 

32 

47 

15 

12.5 

Width  of  body  .                             

20 

*  Extreme  tip  missing. 


Variation.  Only  the  single  specimen  has  been  available  for 
study. 

Distribution.  Known  definitely  from  the  region  south  of  the 
Caspian  Sea.  It  probably  occurs  in  Transcaspia  to  Bokhara  and 
northern  Persia. 


142  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Eumeces  zarudnyi  Nikolsky 

(Fig.   10) 

SYNONYMY 

1899.  Eumeces  zarudnyi  Nikolsky.  Ann.  Mus.  Zool.,  4,  1899,  p.  399  (type  description  in 
Latin;  type  locality  Seistan  and  Kirman  in  Eastern  Persia,  Zarudny  Coll.);  Yearb. 
Zool.  Mus.  Imp.  Acad.  Sci.  St.  Petersburg,  IV,  1899,  p.  400  (description  in  Russian; 
I  am  uncertain  which  of  these  two  descriptions  was  first  published ;  both  bear  the 
date  1899). 

History.  The  three  cotypes  of  this  species  were  collected  by  N. 
A.  Zarudny  on  an  expedition  into  Persia.  The  localities  given  are 
as  follows:  No.  9339,*  Buzman  (Urbs  Busman)  in  Eastern  Kirman; 
No.  9340,  Labeab  in  Seistan;  No.  9341,  Schur-ab  in  eastern  Kir- 
man. The  description,  while  brief  and  lacking  detail  on  very 
numerous  important  points,  does  seem  to  point  to  a  form  worthy 
of  either  specific  or  subspecific  recognition.  Unfortunately,  I  have 
seen  no  specimen  referable  to  this  species. 

The  comparison  given  is  with  E.  schneiderii,  but  just  what  form 
Nikolsky  has  in  mind  I  cannot  say  since  he  (Nikolsky,  1905)  places 
both  princeps  and  pavimentatus  as  synonyms  of  schneiderii. 

Diagnosis.  Related  to  schneiderii;  the  hind  limb  about  two  to 
two  and  one  fifth  times  in  length  from  snout  to  vent;  anterior  loreal 
one  and  one  half  times  as  high  as  wide;  frontonasal  as  long  as  wide; 
no  postnasal.    Scales  in  26  rows. 

Description  of  the  species  (from  Nikolsky).  Nasal  scales  touch- 
ing two  anterior  labials;  nostril  above  the  anterior  third  of  the 
first  labial;  postnasal  wanting;  four  supraoculars;  (the  description 
notes  five  supraoculars,  but  it  appears  likely  that  the  last  large 
superciliary  is  regarded  as  the  fifth)  ;  frontonasal  as  long  as  wide 
or  length  less  than  width;  three  supraoculars  touch  the  frontal; 
parietals  not  in  contact  behind  the  interparietal;  ear  opening  large, 
the  anterior  edge  with  five-six  acute  lobules;  diameter  of  the  ear  is 
scarcely  less  than  the  longitudinal  diameter  of  the  eye ;  two  unpaired 
postmental  scutes. 

Dorsal  scales  of  the  body  smooth,  arranged  in  26  longitudinal 
rows;  lateral  scales  smaller;  scales  of  four  longitudinal  vertebral 
rows  much  larger  than  the  abdominal  scales;  scales  of  the  two 
middle  vertebral  rows  twice  as  wide  as  long;  with  limbs  adpressed, 
the  toes  touch  carpus  of  front  foot;  subcaudals  widened. 

Color.  Body  brownish-gray  above,  yellowish-white  below;  base 
of  tail  red  above;  a  white  lateral  stripe  passes  from  eye  through  ear 
to  femur. 


*  I  designate  this  specimen  as  the  lectotype. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  143 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  zarudnyi  Nikolsky 

Total  length  347  Length  of  foreleg 36 

Tail    236  Length  of  hind  leg 52 

Width  of  head 20 

R(  marl:s.  Whether  the  specimens  mentioned  by  Blanford  (1872) 
belong  to  this  species  I  cannot  say,  but  it  seems  likely  that  they 
approach  closer  to  this  form  than  to  the  real  pavimentatus.  These 
specimens,  nine  in  all,  were  collected  in  southern  Persia  (save  one 
at  Pishin,  Baluchistan).  All  the  specimens  from  Persia  have  26 
scale  rows.  The  only  other  scale  data  is  as  follow:  "The  foreleg 
when  laid  forward  in  some  specimens  only  reaches  the  eye,  in  others 
it  extends  to  the  end  of  the  snout.  The  nasal  shield  is  divided  in 
all  my  specimens,  and  two  central  rows  of  dorsal  scales  are  broader 
than  the  others  .  .  .  The  color  is  olive  gray  or  sandy  gray,  with 
at  times  golden  yellow  longitudinal  stripes,  varying  in  breadth  and 
distribution,  down  the  sides.  In  two  specimens  from  Sarjan  there 
are  dusky  longitudinal  bands  down  the  back  and  sides." 

The  specimens  concerned  are  two  from  Sarjan  near  Karman 
(Kirman),  southern  Persia,  5,500  feet,  and  six  specimens  from  Niriz, 
east  of  Shiraz,  southern  Persia,  4,000-6,000  feet  elevation. 

The  specimen  from  Pishin,  Baluchistan,  has  28  scale  rowrs. 

It  is  quite  likely  that  the  specimens  from  Waziristan  noted  by 
Ingoldsby  and  Proctor  (1923)  may  likewise  belong  close  to  this 
form,  or  represent  a  distinct  species. 

Distribution.  Known  only  from  the  type  series  from  Kirman  and 
Seistan. 

Eumeces  blythianus  (Anderson) 

(Plate  8) 
SYNONYMY 

1871.  Mabouia  blythiana  Anderson.  Proc.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  1871,  p.  186  (type  descrip- 
tion; type  locality  [?]  Amritzur,  Punjab;  Purchased  from  a  Bokhara  merchant,  who 
stated  it  was  obtained  at  Amritzur). 

1876.  Eumeces  blythianus  Theobald.  Desc.  Cat.  Rept.  British  India,  1876,  p.  66  and  p.  X, 
synopsis  (short  description  taken  from  type  description) ;  Blanford,  Eastern  Persia, 
Vol.  II  (Zoology  and  Geology),  1870-1872,  p.  388;  Boulenger,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus., 
Ill,  1887,  p.  385  (redescription  of  type) ;  Boulenger,  Fauna  of  Brit.  India,  Reptiles, 
1890,  p.  222  (redescription  of  type);  Finn,  Proc.  Asiatic  Soc.  Bengal,  July,  1898,  pp. 
189-190 ;  Annandale,  Journ.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  New  Series,  I,  No.  5,  May,  1905, 
p.  150  (type  locality  listed) ;  Boulenger,  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1898,  p.  722 
(Afridi  Country,  Green  Coll.) ;   Mertens,  Senckenbergiana,  Bd.  2,  Heft.  6,  1920,  p.  179. 

History.  This  species  has  been  known  for  more  than  sixty  years, 
having  been  described  by  Anderson  in  1871  from  a  specimen  ob- 
tained from  a  merchant  from  Bokhara,  who  stated  he  had  obtained 
it  at  Amritzur,  Punjab.  Most  of  the  data  published  after  this  time 
on  this  species  has  been  derived  from  this  carefully  made  type 


144  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

description.  Practically  nothing  new  has  been  learned  of  the  form. 
A  new  locality  was  added  by  Finn  (1898) :  Afridi  Country  (Green, 
Collector). 

The  data  incorporated  here  are  drawn  chiefly  from  two  photo- 
graphs of  this  last  mentioned  specimen,  prepared  for  me  by  Mr. 
H.  W.  Parker  of  the  British  Museum.  These  photographs  are  re- 
markably clear  and  only  a  few  characters  cannot  be  ascertained 
owing  to  the  position  of  the  body.  A  few  data  are  taken  from  the 
type  description. 

Diagnosis.  A  member  of  the  Schneiderii  group,  the  dorsal  region 
olive-brown,  with  three  brown  stripes.  A  well-defined  dark  brown 
stripe  on  the  side,  bordered  below  by  a  clearly  defined,  broad, 
yellowish  line;  limbs  well-developed,  overlapping  when  adpressed. 
One  postmental;  no  postnasal;  prefrontals  in  contact;  30  scale  rows 
about  the  middle  of  the  body;  the  two  median  dorsal  rows  greatly 
widened;  frontoparietals  forming  a  broad  suture;  interparietal  large, 
not  inclosed  by  the  parietals;  about  60  scales  from  parietals  to 
above  vent.  (Character  of  anals  unknown  but  presumably  as  in 
other  members  of  the  Schneiderii  group,  with  median  overlapping 
outer.) 

Description  (drawn  from  type  description  and  data  on  a  speci- 
men in  the  British  Museum  of  Natural  History  [No.  98,  7,  12,  1]). 
Rostral  triangular,  hexagonal,  separated  from  the  frontonasal  by 
supranasals,  which  form  a  broad  suture;  frontonasal  wider  than 
long,  separated  from  the  loreal  (touches  loreal  in  type) ;  prefrontals 
large,  hexagonal,  forming  a  broad  median  suture,  and  sutures  with 
the  frontal,  first  supraocular,  first  superciliary,  both  loreals  and 
the  supranasal;  frontal  large,  much  wider  anteriorly  than  poste- 
riorly, the  anterior  margin  forming  an  obtuse  angle ;  frontoparietals 
moderate,  forming  a  strong  median  suture;  interparietal  large, 
broad,  very  sharply  truncate  behind  (wedge-shaped  in  type) ;  parie- 
tals large,  widely  separated  behind  interparietal,  the  right  seg- 
mented, forming  an  extra  scale  between  parietal  and  upper  secondary 
temporal;  three  pairs  of  nuchals,  the  anterior  pair  largest. 

Nasal  divided,  the  anterior  part  triangular,  posterior  part  sub- 
quadrangular;  anterior  loreal  much  higher  than  wide,  higher  than 
posterior,  touching  second  and  third  labials;  posterior  loreal  higher 
than  long;  two  presuboculars,  anterior  largest;  seven  or  eight  super- 
ciliaries,  the  anterior  and  posterior  largest;  primary  temporal  large; 
lower  secondary  temporal  triangular,  broadly  in  contact  with  pri- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  145 

mary;  upper  secondary  relatively  small;  tertiary  small,  separated 
from  nuchal  and  upper  secondary  temporal  by  a  small  scale,  and 
followed  posteriorly  by  a  rather  large  scale;  eight  upper  labials, 
five  anterior  to  the  subocular,  the  first  and  fifth  smallest,  eighth 
largest,  distinctly  larger  than  seventh,  separated  from  the  auricular 
opening  by  numerous  scales,  its  distance  from  ear  greater  than  its 
length.  Six  or  seven  lower  labials;  an  undivided  postmental,  fol- 
lowed by  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  anterior  pair  in  contact; 
postgenials  rather  short.  Thirty  scale  rows  about  body  (in  type), 
the  two  median  much  widened  transversely,  those  following  the 
nuchals  likewise  very  wide  and  much  wider  than  the  adjoining 
second  row;  59  or  60  scales  in  a  row  from  parietals  to  above  anus; 
two  enlarged  preanals,  with  smaller  lateral  scales;  tail  rounded, 
slightly  laterally  compressed,  one  and  two  thirds  times  as  long  as 
the  body;  a  row  of  enlarged  subcaudals. 

Ear  large,  surrounded  by  21  scales;  four  well-developed  auricular 
lobules;  limbs  well-developed;  terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound 
about  claws. 

Color.  ''Olive-brown  above;  three  dark  brown  longitudinal  lines 
along  the  back,  from  the  nape  to  the  base  of  the  tail.  A  broader 
dark-brown  band  from  the  eye  over  tympanum,  along  the  side.  A 
broad  pale-yellowish  band  below  it  from  below  the  eye,  through 
one  half  of  the  tympanum  along  the  sides  to  the  groin.  A  palish 
dusky  band  from  the  angle  of  the  mouth,  over  the  shoulder,  and 
along  the  side  below  the  yellowish  band.  Upper  surface  and  sides 
of  tail  pale,  uniform  brownish-olive.    All  the  under  parts  yellowish." 

Measurements*  of  Eumeces  blythianus  (Anderson) 

Total  length  240  Forelimb 28 

Head 15  Hind  limb  38 

Body  75  Tail  150 

Variation.  With  the  extremely  small  number  of  specimens,  little 
can  be  known  about  the  amount  of  variation.  Blanford  (1872), 
speaking  of  a  series  of  specimens  which  he  identified  as  Eumeces 
pavimentatus  Geoff.,  states:  "I  find  26  scales  round  the  middle  of 
the  body  in  all  specimens  except  one,  which  is  from  Pishin  in 
Baluchistan,  and  has  28,  this  showing  a  tendency  to  a  passage  into 
the  very  closely  allied  Mabouia  Blythiana  Anderson."  It  appears 
that  his  opinion  is  based  on  the  key  characters  of  scale  rows.  I 
doubt  greatly  that  the  species  are  in  reality  more  closely  related 

*  From  Boulenger  (1887). 
10  —  1123 


146  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

than  schneideri  and  algeriensis.    Finn  (1898)  mentions  "red  spots" 
on  his  specimens. 

Distribution.     Known  definitely  only   from  the  Afridi  district, 
India,  Afghan  borderland.     (Brit.  Mus.  1.) 

Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  (Peters) 

(Plates  9,   10,  Figs.   2,  3;    Figs.   12,   15) 
SYNONYMY 

1837.    Scincus  cyprius   (non  Cuvier)    Gervais.      Ann.    Sci.   Nat.,    (2),   VI,   1836    (1837),   p.   309 

(listed  from  Barbarie). 
1839.    Plestiodon   aldrovandii   (part.)    Dumeril   and   Bibron.      Erp.    Gen.,   V,   p.    701;    Gervais, 

Ann.   Sci.    Nat.,    (3),    1848,   X,    pp.    204-205;    Dumeril,   Arch,    du    Mus.,    VII,    p.    219; 

Guichenot,   Expl.   Sci.   Algerie  Pend.   Ann.,    1840-1842    (1850),   p.    17    (Bone);    Dumeril, 

Cat.  Rept.  Paris  Mus.,  1851,  p.  104  (part.);   Eichwald,  Nouv.  Mem.  Soc.  Nat.  Moscou, 

(2),  IX,  1851,  p.   487;    Dumeril  and  Dumeril,  Cat.   Meth.  Coll.   Rept.   Mus.  Hist.  Nat. 

Paris,     1851,     p.     164     (part.)     (Bone     [Guichenot]     and    Frontiere    S-E     de    Algerie 

[Pelissier] ). 
1845.    Plestiodon  auratus  Gray.     Cat.  Liz.  British  Mus.,  1845,  p.  91   (part.) ;   Jan,  Ann.  Mus. 

Civ.   Milano,  Ind.   Sist.   Rett.   Anf.,   1857,  p.   6. 
1862.    Plestiodon  cyprium  Strauch.      Mem.   Acad.  Imp.   Sci.,   St.   Petersbourg,   (7),  IV,  No.   7, 

1862,  p.  44  (St.  Cloud,  Le  Sig  and  Arzew). 
1864.    Eumeces  pavimentatus  var.  algeriensis  Peters.     Mon.  KSnigl.  Preus.  Acad.  Wiss.  Berlin, 

1864,    pp.    48-49    ("type^description") ;     Boettger,    Abh.    Senckenb.    Nat.    Ges.,    XIII, 

1883,  p.   120  (separate  p.  28;   discussion  and  numerous  localities  given). 
1873.    Eurneaes    pavimentatus    (non.    Geoffroy-St.    Hillaire)    Boettger.      Abh.    Senckenb.    Nat. 

Ges.,   IX,    1873,   p.    140    (separate   p.    20)    (redescribed    from   Morocco);    Boettger,    Ber. 

Senck.   Nat.   Ges.,   1880-1881,  p.   145. 
1887.    Eumeces   algeriensis    Boulenger.      Cat.    Liz.    British    Mus.,    Ill,    1887,    p.    384    (N-West 

Africa);    Boettger,  Cat.   Rept.   Samm.   Mus.   Senckenb.  Nat.   Ges.,  Teil   I,   1893,   p.   112 

(Casablanca,  Ebendaher) ;   Olivier,  Mem.  Soc.  Zool.   France,  1894,  pp.   1-36;   Boulenger, 

Trans.   Zool.    Soc.    London,   XIII,    1895,   p.    136,   pi.   XVI;    Boulenger,   Novitates   Zool., 

XII,    1905,    pp.    73-77    (Dellai'n,    Diruchan,    Atlas    of    Morocco);    Beddard,    Proc.    Zool. 

Soc.   London,   May   16,   1905   (notes   on   circulation   and   brain   of   Eumeces  algeriensis); 

Zulueta,   Bol.   Real   Soc.   Esp.    Hist.   Nat.,   VIII,    Dec,    1908,   pp.    454-455    (Mogador); 

Zulueta,   idem,  IX,   Julio,    1909,   p.    354;    Pellegrin,   Bull.   Soc.    Zool.    France,   XXXVII, 

1912,    pp.    256    and    263    (Fedhalla,    Azemmour,    Mogador,    Fort    Gurgens) ;     Hediger, 

Bliitt.   fur  Aquar-Terr-kund,   XXXIX,   No.   20,   1928,  p.    (Rabat);    Werner,   Sitz.   Acad. 

Wiss.   Wien.   Math-Natur  Klasse,   Abt.   1,   Band   138,   Heft  1   and  2,   1929,  pp.   14   and 

19    (Casablanca);     Werner.,    idem,    Band    140,    Heft    3    and    4,    1931,    pp.    292,    293 

(Taforalt-Berkane  Tiznit,  Agadir.) ;    and  idem,  p.   257. 
1900.    Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriensis  Domergue.     Bull.   Soc.   Geog.  Arch.   Oran,   1900,  p.   270, 

pi.  IX. 
1920.    Eumeces    schneiderii    algeriensis     Mertens.       Senckenbergiana,     II,     1920,    pp.     176-179 

(discussion;    as  subspecies);    Mertens,  idem,  VI,  Heft  5  and  6,  Nov.   1,   1924,  pp.   182- 

184. 

History.  The  first  published  authentic  record  of  this  species 
seems  to  be  that  of  Paul  Gervais  (1837),  who  reported  a  specimen 
of  Scincus  cyprius  Cuv.  collected  in  Algeria  by  Doctor  Guyon. 
Dumeril  and  Bibron  (1839)  mention  a  specimen  from  Algeria  like- 
wise collected  by  Doctor  Guyon  (perhaps  the  same  specimen) 
under  the  name  Plestiodon  aldrovandii.  Strauch  (1862)  reports 
three  specimens  as  Plestiodon  cyprium  from  St.  Cloud,  Le  Sig  and 
Arzew,  and  mentions  a  specimen  collected  by  Guichenot  at  Bone 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  147 

and  specimens  in  the  Paris  Museum  from  the  southeastern  frontier 
of  Algeria  collected  by  Pelissier. 

Peters  (1865),  in  a  discussion  of  the  genus  Eumeces,  mentions 
the  northwest  African  specimens  as  "var.  Algeriensis,"  with  scarcely 
more  "description"  than  to  note  that  the  specimen  from  Persia 
agrees  with  the  Egyptian  form  but  was  separated  by  shape  and 
certain  head  scale  characters  from  the  variety  algeriensis. 

Boettger  11878)  noted  the  form  in  Morocco  as  Eumeces  pavi- 
mentatus,  and  later  (1883)  reverts  to  the  name  proposed  by  Peters 
i Eumeces  pavimentatus  algeriensis). 

Boulenger  (1887)  gave  the  form  full  specific  rank,  as  it  deserves, 
and  it  so  has  been  treated  by  subsequent  authors  with  the  exception 
of  Robert  Mertens  (1920),  who  suggests  that  the  west  Algerian  and 
Moroccan  form  is  of  only  subspecific  importance,  and  later  (1924) 
definitely  places  algeriensis  as  a  subspecies  of  Eumeces  schneiderii 
and  likewise  throws  into  synonymy  Domergue's  (1900)  Eumeces 
algeriensis  meridionalis.  The  species  is  treated  here  with  specific 
rank.  There  appears  to  be  no  intergradation  of  characters  be- 
tween this  and  the  North  African  form  of  Eumeces  schneiderii.  I 
believe  it  wise  to  recognize  two  forms,  algeriensis  algeriensis,  and 
a.  meridionalis  Domergue. 

Boulenger  (1895),  who  discusses  the  distribution  of  algeriensis 
and  schneiderii,  shows  that  algeriensis  is  confined  to  Morocco  and 
Oran  (absent  in  the  Tangiers  peninsula,  Tangitanian  District), 
while  schneiderii  occurs  in  Constantine  and  Tunesia. 

One  may  presume  that  algeriensis  is  a  form  long  isolated  by 
desert  from  the  eastern  stock.  The  occurrence  of  schneiderii  in 
adjacent  territory  (possibly  overlapping)  may  be  a  relatively  recent 
approach  due  to  a  lessening  of  desert  conditions  along  the  coast. 

Diagnosis.  A  very  large  member  of  the  Schneiderii  group,  lack- 
ing evidence  of  longitudinal  lines.  A  series  of  irregular  transverse 
light  bands  alternating  with  similar  ocellated  bands  (reddish  in 
life)  on  a  brown  ground  color.  Four  pairs  of  nuchals;  eight  or 
nine  upper  labials,  five  or  six  preceding  the  subocular  labial;  pre- 
and  postsubocular  series  continuous;  upper  scales  on  lower  eyelid 
not  or  only  slightly  enlarged;  an  area  of  granular  juxtaposed  scales 
following  the  insertion  of  hind  leg,  forming  a  pocket-like  depression 
when  leg  is  folded  back;  median  dorsal  scales  wider  than  adjoining 
scale  rows ;  28-32  rows  about  middle  of  body,  the  scales  more  or  less 
keeled;  median  preanals  overlap  smaller  outer  preanal  scales;  nostril 
above  suture  of  first  labial  and  rostral ;  mental  with  smaller  labial 


148 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


border  than  rostral;  two  postmentals;  no  postnasal;  limbs  touch  or 
are  slightly  separated  when  adpressed. 

Description  of  species.  Portion  of  rostral  visible  above  very 
large,  separating  the  nasals  by  a  relatively  narrow  distance,  and 
not  extending  farther  back  than  highest  point  of  nasals;  supranasals 
placed  diagonally,  forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal  relatively 
small,  a  little  wider  than  long,  in  contact  laterally  with  the  anterior 
loreal,  not  or  but  slightly  larger  than  a  prefrontal;  prefrontals 
forming  a  broad  median  suture,  and  sutures  with  the  frontal, 
frontonasal,  posterior  loreal,  anterior  loreal,  first  superciliary,  and 
first  supraocular,  their  length  in  the  order  named;  frontal  not  or 


Fig.  15.  Eumeces  algeriensis  algeriemis  (Peters).  K.U.  No.  11019; 
Casablanca,  Morocco.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  30  mm.;  width,  29  mm. 


scarcely  angular  anteriorly,  the  sides  somewhat  concave  posteriorly, 
touching  three  supraoculars;  frontoparietals  quadrangular,  forming 
a  median  suture;  interparietal  short,  truncate  posteriorly;  parietals 
rather  transversely  placed,  wider  than  long,  not  in  contact  behind 
interparietal;  four  (or  five)  pairs  of  nuchals  (in  one  specimen  the 
posterior  part  of  the  left  parietal  segmented  and  a  small  intercalated 
scale  between  the  first  pair  of  nuchals) . 

Nasal  large,  divided  by  two  grooves,  one  running  from  nostril  to 
supranasal  and  another  to  the  rostral,  wedged  between  the  rostral 
and  first  labial,  in  contact  with  the  second  labial;  anterior  loreal 
little  higher  than  posterior  loreal;  latter  as  high  as  long;  the 
presuboculars  and  postsuboculars  forming  a  continuous  series;  four 
supraoculars;   six  superciliaries,  the   anterior  and  posterior  large, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  149 

approaching  the  first  supraocular  in  size;  primary  temporal  large 
(divided  on  left  side  in  one)  ;  upper  secondary  quadrangular,  not 
as  large  as  the  lower  secondary  temporal,  which  forms  a  broad 
suture  with  the  anterior;  tertiary  temporal  present,  single  (or 
divided  into  two  parts  on  left  side) ;  nine  (or  eight)  upper  labials, 
the  first  much  the  smallest,  its  suture  with  the  rostral  less  than  half 
the  height  of  the  scale,  separated  from  the  anterior  loreal;  seven  or 
eight  lower  labials;  last  large  labial  followed  by  a  pair  of  large 
postlabials,  the  lower  of  the  two  much  the  larger,  and  might  be 
mistaken  for  one  of  the  labial  series;  these  followed  by  four  vertical 
rows  of  scales  diminishing  in  size  as  the  ear  is  approached;  four 
well-defined  ear  lobules,  more  or  less  rounded  behind;  mental  small, 
the  labial  border  much  less  than  that  of  the  rostral;  two  post- 
mentals,  the  posterior  much  the  larger,  and  (abnormally)  partially 
fused  with  the  fust  pair  of  chinshields;  three  pairs  of  chinshields, 
all  separated,  third  followed  by  a  short  and  broad  postgenial;  this 
latter  followed  by  a  second,  more  elongated  scale. 

Upper  eyelid  well-developed,  the  upper  palpebral  scales  separated 
from  the  superciliaries  by  four  or  five  rows  of  granules;  scales 
bordering  the  lower  palpebral  scales  not  or  only  slightly  enlarged, 
separated  from  the  subocular  by  six  or  seven  rows  of  granules  and 
the  subocular  series ;  ear  surrounded  by  about  twenty  scales. 

Scales  on  the  body  in  longitudinal  rows,  the  median  series  dis- 
tinctly widened;  about  70  scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus;  38 
scales  about  neck  behind  ear;  33  about  constricted  portion  of  neck; 
45  about  body  at  axillary  region;  30  about  the  middle  of  body;  24 
about  base  of  tail;  dorsal,  and  ventral  scales  to  a  lesser  extent, 
wrinkled  or  keeled;  head  scales  somewhat  rugose. 

Limbs  well-developed.  Twenty-eight  scales  about  the  insertion 
of  forearm;  scales  in  axillary  region  granular;  wrist  without  a  wrell- 
defined  tubercle,  this  area  being  covered  with  four  scales  of  equal 
size;  scales  of  forearm  merge  gradually  into  the  rounded  flattened 
tubercles  of  palm,  which  are  subequal  over  much  of  the  surface; 
lamellar  formula  of  fingers:  6;  10;  12;  13;  8.  Fingers  with  an  inter- 
calated series  of  scales  on  outer  side  (except  fifth,  on  inner  side) ; 
the  terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about  the  claws;  about  34 
scales  around  the  insertion  of  the  hind  leg,  an  area  of  small  granu- 
lar scales  forming  a  shallow  pocket  behind  insertion;  toes  with  an 
intercalated  series  of  scales  on  outer  side.  Lamellar  formula  of 
toes:  7;  11;  13;  14;  9;  scales  of  leg  gradually  merge  into  the  rounded 


15t 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


flattened  tubercles  of  heel  and  sole,  which  gradually  become  smaller 
and  more  imbricating  toward  the  base  of  the  median  toes.  Six 
preanal  scales,  the  median  pair  much  enlarged,  overlapping  the 
adjoining  scale,  which  in  turn  overlaps  the  very  small,  scarcely 
differentiated  outermost  scale;  lateral  postanal  scale  differentiated 
noticeably,  its  surfaces  raised  and  rounded;  subcaudal  scales 
much  widened  (normally  about  34  scales).  Head  much  widened 
posteriorly. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  Above,  brown  to  tan;  the  head  generally  more 
orange-brown  on  anterior  part;  beginning  on  shoulder  the  body  is 
traversed  by  irregular  light  bands  about  one  scale  wide,  separated 
by  three  scale  rows,  but  growing  wrider  low  on  sides;  the  median  of 
these  three  rows  bears  a  transverse  band  of  somewhat  ocellated 
spots.  Rostral,  nasal  and  anterior  labials  light.  A  light  cream  spot 
on  seventh  and  eighth  labials,  another  anterior  to  ear;  two  or  three 
vertical  spots  of  cream  on  side  of  neck,  the  anterior  partially  in- 
volving the  ear;  limbs  and  tail  of  a  lighter  tan  than  body;  all  ventral 
surfaces  dull  cream. 


Measurements  of  Eumeces  alg 

?riensis 

T,lgeriensis 

(Peters) 

Museum 

Numberf 

M.C.Z. 
4159 

M.C.Z. 

31449 

Kas. 
11019 

Phil. 
12123 

U.S.N. M. 
37290 

Mich. 
65763 

Phil. 
12122 

M.C.Z. 
31450 

Total  length 

285* 

358 

381* 

305* 

Snout  to  vent 

122 
9.5 

163 
10 

173 
13 

175 
11 

180 

185 

185 
11.5 

185 

Snout  to  eye 

14 

Snout  to  ear    . 

29 
41 

29 

48 

36 
54 

35 

57 

38 
54 

37 

Snout  to  foreleg 

55 

55 

61 

Tail 

163 
23 
23 

195 
38 
33 

208 
29 
30 

220 
30 
32 

Width  of  head 

23 
30 

35 
33 

30 
31 

32 

Length  of  head 

33 

Width  of  body    . 

36 

40 

Foreleg 

38 

43 

49 

47 

46 

50 

49 

48 

Hind  leg 

46 

49 

60 

56 

53 

58 

60 

54 

Longest  toe 

14 

15 

20 

17 

20 

16 

18.2 

16 

Postanal  tail  width 

15 

21 

20 

23 

23 

18 

21 

Axilla  to  groin 

65 

68 

92 

97 

107 

100 

95 

95 

*  Tip  missing  or  regenerated. 

t  4159,   N.   Africa;    31449   and  31450,   Taforalt;    11019,   Casablanca,   Mor.  ;    12123,   12122, 
West  Africa;    37290,   Oran,    Algeria;    65763,   West   Africa;    31450,    Maraaf,    near   Casablanca, 

Mor. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  151 

Variation.  The  largest  specimen  examined  measures  207  mm. 
snout  to  vent  (locality  uncertain;  A.N.S.P.  No.  9386).  The  number 
of  subcaudals  varies  from  83  to  86  in  the  specimens  with  perfect  tail, 
85  in  one  with  the  extreme  tip  regenerated.  The  parietals  are 
inclosed  in  none. 

In  ten  specimens,  the  scales  from  parietals  to  above  anus  vary 
between  66  and  71,  the  number  66  occurring  twice.  67  four  times, 
68  once,  69  once,  70  once,  and  71  once.  The  scale  rows  on  neck 
vary  from  29  to  33,  the  average  being  about  31;  scale  rows  about 
the  middle  of  the  body  28  to  30,  28  occurring  twice,  29  once,  and 
30  seven  times.  Scales  about  base  of  tail  vary  from  20  to  26.  The 
labia's  are  usually  8-8,  the  number  9-9  occurring  twice,  and  8-9  once. 
The  nuchals  are  usually  5-5,  5-4  occurring  three  times  and  4-4  once. 
Invariably  two  postmentals  and  no  postnasals  occur. 

Superciliaries  five  to  seven,  the  usual  number  being  5-5;  7-7  occurs 
twice.  There  are  either  four  or  three  ear  lobules,  three  being  a 
little  more  frequent.  The  frontonasal  is  never  in  contact  with  the 
frontal.  Subdigital  lamellae  under  fourth  toe  eleven  to  fourteen, 
11  occurring  twice,  12  five  times,  13  five  times  and  14  seven  times. 
The  primary  temporal  tends  to  divide,  this  condition  being  present 
in  five  specimens. 

Distribution.  This  subspecies  appears  to  be  confined  to  the 
countries  of  Morocco  and  western  Algeria,  north  of  the  Sahara. 

Locality  records: 

Morocco:  Mogador  (Brit.  Mus.  1)  (Zulueta,  1908;  numerous  specimens) 
(Pellegrin,  1912)  (Boettger,  1883);  Dellain,  Diruchan.  Atlas  of  Morocco 
(Boulenger,  1905) ;  Melilla  (Zulueta,  1909,  1  spec.) ;  Fedhalla  (Pellegrin, 
1912);  Azemmour  (Pellegrin,  1912);  Fort  Gurgens  (Pellegrin,  1912);  Sale 
Oved  (Pellegrin,  1912);  Ykem  Talaint  (Pellegrin,  1912);  Anti-Atlas,  650 
meters  (Pellegrin,  1912);  Morocco  (Brit,  Mus.  1);  Rabat  (Hediger,  1928) 
(Pellegrin,  1912);  Casablanca  (K.U.  1)  (Boettger,  1883)  (Werner,  1929). 

Algeria:  Oran  (Brit.  Mus.  1)  (Paris  Mus.  1)  (TJ.S.N.M.  1);  St.  Cloud 
(Strauch,  1862);  Le  Sig  (Strauch,  1862);  Arzew  (Strauch,  1862);  Bone 
(Guichenot,  1850);  Fleurus  (Oran  Mus.)  Taforalt  (M.C.Z.  1);  Chapelle 
Santa-Cruz  (Domergue,  1900)  ;  Djebel  Yeffry  (Domergue,  1900)  ;  Saint- 
Lucien  (Domergue,  1900) ;  Kleber  (Domergue,  1900) ;  Saint  Leu  (Dom- 
ergue, 1900) ;  Ai'n-Temouchent  (Domergue,  1900) ;  Lamoriciere  (Domergue, 
1900). 

Unidentified  localities:  Northwest  Africa  (Brit.  Mus.  5) ;  West  Africa  (A.N.S.P 
2)  (Mich.  U.  1);  North  Africa  (M.C.Z.  1). 


152  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Eumeces  algeriensis  meridionalis  Domergue 

(Fig.    12) 

SYNONYMY 

1900.  Eumeces  algeriensis  var.  meridionalis  Domergue.  Soc.  Geog.  Arch.  Prov.  Oran,  XX, 
1900,  p.  272,  pi.  XVI,  fig.  3  (type  description;  type  locality,  Ain  Sefra) ;  Werner, 
Sitz.  Kaiserl.  Akad.  Wiss.  Math.,  Natur.  Klasse  Wien.,  CXXIII,  pt.  IV,  Apr.,  1914, 
pp.  352,  354,  350;  and  ibid,  CXXXVIII  Band,  Abt,  I,  Heft  1  and  2,  1929,  p.  11 
(Ain  Sefra). 

History.  This  form  was  first  recognized  by  Domergue  (1900) 
in  his  work  on  the  Herpetology  of  Oran,  and  very  briefly  char- 
acterized. The  characters  chosen  to  distinguish  the  form  are  those 
based  on  the  "sousoculaires"  (the  pre-  and  postsuboculars),  the  first 
superciliary,  and  the  ear  lobules.  The  type  specimen  is  very  young, 
"de  11  et  15  mm."  Domergue  states  that  three  adult  examples  were 
later  received  from  M.  Gaston  Buchet  from  Cap  Sim  (Mogador), 
which  he  refers  to  the  same  variety.  Whether  his  reference  of  these 
specimens  to  'meridionalis  can  be  taken  so  that  they  can  be  regarded 
as  part  of  the  type  series  I  do  not  know.  If  so,  I  propose  to  desig- 
nate the  smaller,  Ain  Sefra,  specimen  as  the  lectotype,  as  there  may 
be  some  doubt  as  to  whether  the  two  forms  should  be  regarded  as 
the  same  subspecies. 

Diagnosis.  Related  to  algeriensis  algeriensis  but  differing  in  hav- 
ing a  lower  number  of  scales  (usually  six  or  seven  less)  from  occiput 
to  above  vent;  a  reduction  in  the  number  of  nuchals  (usually  only 
a  single  pair  instead  of  four  or  five).  Two  or  four  scale  rows  less 
about  the  tail  at  base;  a  higher  number  of  superciliaries  (usually 
8-8)  ;  8-10  scales  in  the  combined  pre-  and  postsubocular  series; 
these  narrow  and  elongate  instead  of  nearly  square. 

Scales,  in  27  or  28  rows  about  middle  of  body;  upper  labials,  8-8; 
postmentals,  two;  no  postnasal;  subdigital  lamellae  under  fourth 
toe  18;  an  area  of  granular  scales  posterior  to  insertion  of  hind  leg; 
inner  preanals  overlap  outer  scales. 

The  markings  are  generally  similar  to  those  of  algeriensis. 

Variation.  Among  the  three  topotypes  from  Ain  Sefra  in  the 
Harvard  Museum  of  Comparative  Zoology,  there  is  a  rather  negli- 
gible amount  of  variation.  The  scales  from  parietals  to  above  anus 
are  62,  62,  60.  Scales  about  the  narrow  part  of  neck  are  30,  29,  30; 
in  axillary  region,  36,  36,  36;  around  middle  of  body,  28,  27,  28; 
upper  labials,  8-8,  8-8,  8-8.  (On  the  last  specimen  the  eighth  labial 
on  one  side  is  broken) ;  scales  around  ear,  19,  19,  20.  The  supra- 
oculars are  in  the  first  4-5,  one  scale  being  broken;  in  the  second  the 
supraoculars  are  badly  broken;  in  the  third  they  are  normally  4-4; 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces 


153 


Measurements  of  Eumeces  algeriensis  meridionalis  Domergue 


Museum. 

Number . 


Snout  to  vent  .  .  . 

Tail 

Snout  to  eye. .  .  . 
Snout  to  ear  .  .  . 
Snout  to  foreleg. 
Axilla  to  groin. . 
Width  of  head. . . 
Length  of  head. . 
Postanal  width .  . 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Longest  toe 


M  C.Z. 
27455 


124 
176* 
8 

23 

40 

67 

22 

23 

17 

34 

44 

12 


M.C.Z. 

27454 


119 
132* 
8 

24 

37 

63 

21 

22 

14 

30 

39 

11.5 


M.C.Z 
27  153 


87 
119 

7 
19 
29 
45 
16 
17 

9 
25 
33 
11 


*  Regeneratul. 

postmentals  invariable;  behind  anus,  only  one  or  two  divided  sub- 
caudals,  followed  by  93  (in  smallest)  widened  subcaudals;  pre- 
frontals invariably  in  contact;  three  supraoculars  (normally  touch 
frontal)  ;  pre-  and  postsubocular  series  8-9,  9-10,  7-9.  The  temporals 
and  posterior  labials  are  much  the  same,  save  that  in  the  first  and 
largest,  the  upper  secondary  temporal  is  divided  abnormally. 

Color  variation.  No.  27455.  Light  transverse  bars  strongly  evi- 
dent; the  ocellated  lines  dimly  indicated;  white  lateral  spots  con- 
tinuous with  the  transverse  bars;  top  of  head  strongly  clotted  with 
brown.  Ground  color  olive,  tail  lighter  in  color  than  body.  Neck 
spots  dim. 

No.  27454.  Same  as  the  preceding,  but  the  ocellated  lines  more 
distinct;  head  heavily  spotted,  rostral  brown.  Nasal,  supranasals 
light  without  spots;  labials  light  with  some  white  blotches. 

No.  27453.  The  lines  of  ocelli  extend  as  far  as  nuchals;  17  or  18 
light  transverse  lines;  ten  or  twelve  lateral  spots  continuous  with 
the  transverse  lines;  tail  distinctly  banded  with  lighter. 

It  appears  that  the  three  specimens  listed  here  are  those  mentioned 
by  Werner  (1929),  although  there  are  slight  discrepancies  in  the 
measurements. 

Distribution.  This  subspecies  is  known  from  the  type  locality, 
Ain  Sefra.  Domergue  has  placed  in  the  subspecies  specimens  from 
Mogador,  but  this  association  may  be  questioned  until  verified  by 
other  material  from  this  localitv. 


154  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

LONGIROSTRIS  GROUP 

A  single  species,  Eumeces  longirostris,  is  included,  characterized 
by  dorsolateral  and  lateral  light  lines,  which  become  more  or  less 
lost  in  the  adult ;  the  scale  rows  on  the  sides  are  in  diagonal  rather 
than  in  parallel  rows;  a  postnasal;  a  single,  undivided  postmental; 
scales  in  32-36  rows;  four  supraoculars;  three  pairs  of  chinshields; 
limbs  elongate,  strongly  overlapping  when  adpressed  (in  adults)  ; 
eight  (or  ten)  scales  border  anterior  edge  of  anus;  outer  two  or  three 
small,  the  third  or  fourth  somewhat  larger,  overlapping  the  median 
enlarged  anals  and  the  adjoining  outer  anal  scale.  A  group  of  small 
scales  behind  insertion  of  hind  leg. 

The  single  isolated  species,  Eumeces  longirostris  (Cope),  con- 
sidered in  this  group,  combines  features  that  are  characteristic  of 
certain  other  groups,  as,  for  example,  the  complete  separation  of  the 
palpebrals  from  the  superciliaries;  the  group  of  smaller  scales  fol- 
lowing the  insertion  of  the  hind  leg;  and  the  much  enlarged  lower 
secondary  temporal,  all  suggest  characters  occurring  in  members  of 
the  Schneiderii  group.  However,  it  differs  from  these  in  many  of 
their  most  typical  characters. 

It  has  the  general  color  pattern  of  the  Skiltonianus  or  Anthr acinus 
groups,  but  differs  in  the  character  of  the  preanal  scales,  the 
squamation  of  the  digits,  the  general  character  (shape)  of  the 
temporals,  the  general  contours  of  the  body,  longer  legs,  the  much 
greater  number  of  scale  rows,  and  their  direction  of  growth  on  the 
sides.  In  this  latter  character,  the  diagonal  rows  of  scales,  it 
agrees  with  obsoletus,  but  here  the  resemblance  ceases.  From  the 
Fasciatus  group,  which  occupies  the  territory  along  the  Atlantic 
coast,  it  differs  in  most  of  the  diagnostic  characters. 

Should  we  hypothesize  that  it  is  a  form  that  has  reached  the 
Bermudas  from  continental  America,  derived  from  some  form  now 
living,  we  would  have  to  consider  these  unique  modifications  as  an 
immediate  result  of  restriction  to  a  low  oceanic  island  and  the 
intricate  interplay  of  associated  environmental  factors  which  have 
acted  as  the  stimulus  for  the  mutations  or  have  selected  them.  I 
am  inclined  to  the  opinion  that  it  is  a  relic  of  the  more  ancient 
dissemination  of  the  group  (genus)  as  evidenced  by  the  presence 
of  the  Schwartzei  group  in  Mexico  and  Central  America,  with  the 
most  closely  related  Taeniolatus  group  in  the  Central  and  Western 
Asiatic  regions.  It  may  be  regarded  as  a  form  contemporaneous 
with  the  ancestors  of  the  present  Fasciatus,  Anthracinus  and  Skil- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  155 

tonianus  groups,  that  has  maintained  its  primitive  characters  due 
to  its  long  sojourn  in  an  environment  that  has  in  all  probability 
changed  hut  little  since  its  arrival. 

Eumeces  longirostris  (Cope) 

(Plate  11;    Figs.    1<;.   17) 
SYNONYMY 

1859.  Scincus  related  to  S.  fasciatus,  Jones.     Naturalist   in   Bermuda. 

1860.  Scincus  fasciatus   Godet.      Bermuda,   1860,  p.   251. 

1860.  Scincus  ocellatus  Godet.     Bermuda.  I860,  p.  251. 

1861.  Plestiodon   longirostris   Cope.      Proc.    Acad.    Nat.    Sci.    Pbila.,   Oct.,    1861,   pp.   312-314 
(type    description:     type    locality,    Bermuda);     Garman,    Bull.    Essex    Inst.,    XVI,    .Ian.    9, 

1884,  p.  l")  (under  Eumeces);  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Checklist  X.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept., 

HUT.  p.  70. 
1*7."'.  Eumeces  longirostris  Cope.  Bull.  V.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  1,  1875,  p.  4.">  (Bermuda 
Islands);  Goode,  Amer.  Jour.  Sci.,  1877,  p.  290;  Garman,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No. 
25,  1885,  part  4,  Rept.  Bermuda,  pp,  287-289  (detailed  history  and  description  of 
the  species);  Boulenger,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  pp.  368-369;  Cope,  Ann. 
Rep.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  1898  (1900),  pp.  631-632,  fig.  124;  Fowler,  Proc.  Acad. 
Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  LXVII,  Apr,,  1915,  p.  254  (Ducking  Stool,  Bermuda):  Steuiegr  and 
Barbour,  Checklist  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  2d  Ed.,  1923,  p.  76;  idem,  3d  Ed.,  1933, 
P.  31. 

History.  This  species  appears  to  have  been  first  noticed  by  Mr. 
Jones,  in  1859,  in  "The  Naturalist  in  Bermuda."  He  reported  it 
as  common,  while  former  writers  had  either  not  mentioned  it  or 
stated  that  lizards  did  not  occur.  D.  T.  L.  Godet,  in  ''Bermuda,"  in 
I860,  mentioned  two  species,  Scincus  fasciatus  and  Scincus  ocellatus. 
It  Avould  appear  that  he  mistook  old  males  for  the  ocellatus,  and 
the  young  blue-tailed  ones  for  the  Scincus  fasciatus. 

In  1861  Cope  described  the  species  under  the  name  Plestiodon 
longirostris,  giving  a  careful  description,  and  comparing  the  form 
with  Plestiodon  laticeps. 

Garman  (1885)  gives  a  good  description  and  reviews  the  history 
of  the  species.  He  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  Captain  John 
Smith,  of  colonial  fame,  reported  "large"  lizards  on  the  islands  in 
earlier  times,  but  at  the  time  of  his  writing  they  were  extinct,  having 
been  killed  by  cats.  Garman  is  uncertain  whether  the  author  might 
be  referring  to  this  species  or  to  a  larger  insular  species  such  as 
occurs  now  in  the  Galapagos  Islands.  The  term  "large"  is  or  may  be 
very  relative,  and  unfortunately  no  standard  of  size  is  given. 

The  six  types  were  collected  by  J.  H.  Darrell,  who  sent  them  to 
the  U.  S.  National  Museum.     The  type  locality  is  "Bermuda." 

Later,  Yarrow  (1882)  reports  another  specimen  in  the  United 
States  National  Museum,  collected  by  G.  Brown  Goode.  In  1887, 
Boulenger  describes  the  form  from  a  lot  of  four  specimens  obtained 
in  Bermuda  by  the  Challenger  Expedition.     Since  that  time  large 


156  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

series  have  reached  Eastern  Museums,  collected  by  Philip  Pope, 
L.  S.  Mobray,  E.  Q.  Vanatta,  T.  H.  Bean,  R.  L.  Ditmars,  T.  Bar- 
bour, Mr.  Gross  and  E.  L.  Mark. 

The  six  types  are  catalogued  under  U.S.N.M.  No.  4737.  I  desig- 
nate the  largest  specimen,  having  a  body  length  of  71  millimeters 
and  a  tail  length  of  approximately  76  millimeters,  as  the  lectotype. 
The  series  is  in  good  condition. 

Diagnosis.  Eumeces  longirostris  is  a  medium-sized  species  of  the 
genus,  reaching  a  body  length  of  80  mm.,  characterized  by  a  dorso- 
lateral line  beginning  above  the  first  superciliary  and  continuing  to 
base  of  tail;  a  lateral  line  beginning  on  the  anterior  labials  and 
continuing  to  tail,  sometimes  broken  on  side  of  neck;  evidence  of  a 
sublatoral  line  in  young.  Scales  small,  in  32-36  rows  around  body, 
the  dorsal  and  lateral  scales  smaller  than  ventrals,  the  laterals 
smallest,  and  arranged  in  distinct  diagonal  rows  on  the  sides  of 
body;  a  postnasal  present;  the  postmenfal  undivided;  limbs  long, 
strongly  overlapping  (18  millimeters  in  adults)  when  adpressed; 
four  supraoculars,  three  touching  the  frontal;  a  large  pair  of  nuchals, 
sometimes  followed  by  a  second  very  narrow  pair;  seven  or  eight 
upper  labials,  four  or  five  preceding  the  subocular.  The  typical 
lines  are  lost  in  old  specimens. 

Description  of  species.  Rostral  distinctly  wider  than  high  (2  mm. 
to  21/2mm.),  forming  an  angle  behind;  supranasals  relatively  very 
large,  forming  a  broad  median  suture,  touching  nasal  and  postnasal 
laterally,  the  first  loreal  and  frontonasal  posteriorly;  the  suture 
with  the  loreal  less  than  half  that  with  the  frontonasal;  frontonasal 
much  broader  than  long,  forming  sutures  with  the  anterior  loreals; 
prefrontals  large,  very  wide,  forming  a  median  suture  equal  to  half 
their  width,  laterally  in  contact  with  the  two  loreals,  the  suture 
with  the  first  less  than  half  that  with  the  second;  the  suture  of  the 
first  supraocular  large,  that  of  first  superciliary  small  (K.U.  7280 
abnormal  in  having  the  first  superciliary  broken  and  joining  with 
a  segment  from  the  first  supraocular  so  that  there  are  five  supra- 
oculars on  the  left  side ) ;  frontal  forming  an  obtuse  angle  anteriorly, 
broadly  in  contact  with  the  three  anterior  supraoculars,  abruptly 
pointed  behind,  separating  the  frontoparietals  and  coming  in  contact 
with  the  attenuated  end  of  the  interparietal  (or  with  frontoparietals 
in  contact  narrowly )  ;  parietals  not  greatly  widened,  separated 
widely  by  the  interparietal;  one  pair  of  nuchals,  normally  (rarely 
two;  when  present,  the  anterior  much  larger  but  not  so  wide  trans- 
versely as  the  posterior) ;  frontoparietals  small,  touching  two  supra- 
oculars. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Kr. mixes  157 

Nostril  pierced  in  the  nasal,  which  is  divided  by  two  sutures 
from  nostril,  the  posterior  part  small,  being  merely  the  rim  of  the 
nostril,  the  anterior  part  smaller  than  postnasal;  the  nostril  is 
posterior  to  suture  of  first  labial  with  rostral;  postnasal  distinct, 
touching  two  labials;  two  loreals,  both  very  low,  the  anterior  loreal 
not  higher  than  greatest  height  of  second;  latter  longer  than  high, 
truncate  posteriorly,  separated  from  the  subocular  labial  by  two 
presubocular  scales,  the  anterior  much  larger  than  posterior;  seven 
or  eight  superciliaries;  four  supraoculars  normally,  three  touching 
the  frontal ;  five  small  postsuboculars,  upper  posterior  enlarged,  the 


Fig.  16.  Eumeces  longirostris  (Cope).  K.TJ.  No.  7280;  Castle  Island, 
Bermuda  Islands.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Ac- 
tual head  length,  14  mm.;  width,  12  mm. 

others  scarcely  differentiated  from  small  scales  of  lower  eyelid;  ten 
upper  palpebral  scales,  normally  separated  from  the  superciliaries 
by  a  row  of  small  granules;  lower  eyelid  with  a  series  of  enlarged, 
vertically  elongate  scales,  separated  from  the  subocular  by  five  rows 
of  small  granular  scales;  two  very  small  postoculars. 

Eight  upper  labials,  the  fifth  smallest,  the  eighth  largest,  or 
seventh  and  eighth  of  nearly  equal  size  and  height;  the  primary 
temporal  quadrangular,  wedged  between  and  forming  equal  sutures 
with  the  seventh  and  eighth  labials,  separated  from  the  parietal  by 
the  last  postsubocular;  two  large  secondary  temporals,  the  upper 
elongate,  slender,  nearly  three  times  as  long  as  wide,  in  contact 
with  the  parietal  its  entire  length;  lower  secondary  temporal  very 
large,  much  larger  than  eighth  labial,  its  lower  posterior  side  slightly 
rounded;  this  is  followed  by  a  narrow,  elongated  tertiary  temporal; 
eighth  labial  separated  from  ear  by  three  or  four  postlabial  scales 


158  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

covering  a  distance  equal  to  the  entire  length  of  eighth  labial; 
temporals  separated  from  ear  by  one  or  two  scales;  ear  opening 
large,  vertically  oval,  twice  as  high  as  wide. 

Mental  large,  having  a  much  wider  labial  border  than  the  rostral; 
postmental  single,  very  large;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  first 
pair  in  contact,  two  following  pairs  separated;  third  pair  followed 
by  an  elongate  postgenial  and  a  smaller,  similarly  shaped  scale, 
longer  than  wide. 

Dorsal  scales  larger  than  laterals,  and  usually  smaller  than 
ventrals;  scale  rows  on  sides  of  body  and  tail  diagonal;  the  median 
ventral  series  of  the  tail  somewhat  widened  (about  1.2  to  2.9  mm.), 
109  scales  in  the  subcaudal  series.  The  number  of  scales  in  a  row 
from  parietal  to  above  anus,  63  to  67 ;  scales  about  auricular  opening 
26  to  31 ;  two  or  three  minute  lobules  on  auricular  margin. 

Thirty  scales  about  insertion  of  leg;  about  24  around  insertion  of 
arm;  outer  wrist  tubercle  rounded,  padlike,  separated  from  typical 
arm  scales  by  three  rows  of  granules.  Ten  or  eleven  large,  rounded, 
padlike  scales  on  palm  surrounded  by  smaller  granular  scales,  and 
a  few  interpolated  among  the  group;  the  lamellae  under  proximal 
two  thirds  of  toes  flattened  pads,  not  imbricating;  one  or  two  series 
of  intercalated  scales  on  basal  half  (or  two  thirds)  of  fingers  on 
inner  side,  between  the  dorsal  and  ventral  lamellae;  none  on  outer 
side.  On  the  toes,  this  same  condition  exists,  the  two  intercalated 
series  reaching  to  or  almost  to  the  last  distal  joint. 

Claws  short,  thick,  the  terminal  lamellae  not  bound  tightly  about 
claws;  heel  scales  large,  contiguous,  juxtaposed,  none  of  the  larger 
or  smaller  scales  on  the  sole  imbricating.  In  the  axilla  there  is  a 
group  of  small,  nonimbricating,  pavementlike  scales,  and  a  similar 
but  somewhat  less  extensive  group  back  of  the  insertion  of  the  hind 
leg;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  8;  11;  15;  17;  11;  for  toes:  9;  13; 
18;  24;  14. 

Ten  scales  border  anterior  edge  of  vent,  the  three  outer  on  each 
side  very  small ;  the  fourth  enlarged  somewhat,  and  overlapping  the 
very  strongly  enlarged  median  scales,  and  likewise  overlapping 
the  adjoining  smaller  scale,  differing  thus  from  other  known  species; 
three  scales  in  the  lateral  postanal  region  of  males  differentiated; 
these  are  somewhat  rounded  on  the  surface  and  shaped  differently 
from  the  surrounding  scales.  The  pitting  on  the  scales  is  extensive, 
occurring  along  the  sides  of  neck  and  body  and  for  some  distance 
on  the  tail;  these  are  also  prominent  in  posthumeral  and  post- 
femoral  regions;  a  few  dorsal  scales  likewise  have  dim  evidence  of 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  159 

pits.  There  are  usually  six  pits,  frequently  more;  they  are  elon- 
gated, extending  along  the  posterior  edge  of  the  scale  for  a  short 
distance. 

Body  moderately  stout,  with  a  relatively  short  axilla  to  groin 
measurement,  the  distance  from  the  snout  to  forearm  contained  in 
the  axilla  to  groin  distance  1.3  times;  limbs  strongly  developed, 
the  adpressed  hind  limb  reaching  elbow  of  adpressed  foreleg  or  just 
failing  to  reach  the  axilla;  the  foreleg  about  two  thirds  the  distance 
from  axilla  to  groin,  reaching  forward  to  beyond  eye;  the  width  of 
body  contained  in  head  and  body  length  little  more  than  five  times; 
tail  heavy,  thick  at  base;  head  slender,  somewhat  longer  than  wide, 
the  snout  somewhat  elongated  but  not  conspicuously  so.  Diameter 
of  eye  contained  1.35  times  in  the  distance  from  tip  of  snout. 

Color  and  markings  (from  K.U.  No.  8215,  Bermuda).  General 
ground  color  of  dorsal  region  grayish  olive,  practically  uniform  on 
four  median  rows  anteriorly,  and  six  median  rows  posteriorly; 
dorsolateral  line  light  greenish  to  creamy  white.  It  originates  on 
the  edge  of  first  supraocular,  continues  back  to  base  of  tail,  covering 
2  half  scale  rows;  it  is  bordered  above  by  a  deep  brown  line  equal 
to  one  scale  row  in  width  anteriorly,  narrowing  posteriorly;  rostral 
region  light,  with  two  light  areas  extending  back  along  prefrontals 
and  onto  sides  of  frontal;  labials  with  a  few  scattered,  creamy,  ir- 
regularly placed  whitish  spots,  more  or  less  linear  in  arrangement, 
the  line  passing  through  ear  and  continuing  as  a  broken  series  of 
spots  to  above  forelimb,  becoming  continuous  here  and  continuing 
to  groin;  between  the  light  lines  the  color  is  deep  chocolate  brown 
for  a  width  of  about  four  to  four  and  a  half  scales;  ventral  to  lower 
light  line  and  bordering  it  is  a  narrow,  dark  chocolate-brown  stripe ; 
chin  and  lower  labials  light,  belly  bluish  gray;  the  lateral  brown 
stripe  continues  some  distance  on  tail. 

Variation.  This  form,  like  most  of  the  other  species,  shows  con- 
siderable variation  in  the  evolution  of  the  color  pattern  due  to  age. 
The  scale  relationships  appear  rather  constant.  Some  40  specimens 
examined  show  the  postnasal  present  in  all  save  one  (A.M.N.H.  No. 
27180),  and  only  a  single  specimen  (A.M.N.H.  No.  27172)  has  two 
postmentals.  The  number  of  labials  varies  between  seven  and  eight. 
The  latter  number  is  due  to  the  breaking  of  the  third  or  fourth 
labials  into  two  parts.  Thus  either  four  or  five  labials  precede  the 
subocular  labial.  In  forty  specimens,  25  have  five  preceding  the 
subocular  (eight  upper  labials)  and  14  have  four  preceding  the 
subocular  (seven  labials)   and  one  specimen  four  on  one  side,  five 


160 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


CD 

P. 

o 
U 

ec 
O 

C» 

o 

» — a 

cc 
<^ 
O 
<» 


3 

^ 


a 


CO 
s- 

3 

- 


o 

CO 

H 


-^  CO 

.2©» 

M  CO 

gin 


-.so 


Ss 


02  •* 


02-* 


CO-tf 


/.  -t 


S  * 

3.0 

Sax 


t-      CM 


00 
ID 


01 


O       01 
■1        Ol 


05 


i-i       i-i       O       "5 

oi     co     i-h     co 


00 


t^     co 


o> 

to 

"* 

O 

o 

U3 

CO 

Ol 

T-i 

^H 

i— 1 

Ol 

^H 

Ol 

CO 

1—1 

t--        Ol 


rt     oo 

rt         tO 


rH         CO 

to     oi 


to        CO 
lO        Ol 


co 


CO 
Ol 


lO 


to 
o 


to 

OS 


co      >ra 
co     i-i 


o 

Ol 


o     co 

CM         i-H 


C5  -H  T)H 

r-i     co     i-i 


m     >n     <-i 

iH        CM        i-H 


lC  ^  ^H 

•-I        Ol        i-l 


i-i      o 

tM        —I 


0) 


-a 
o 


o 

H 


03 


-- 

3 

3 

M 

o 

O 

o 

s 

a 

a 

a 

o 

CO 

CO 

CO 

i-l 

£    £ 


co 
O 

Cm 


o 


-a 
a 


so 
c 
o 


Ml 
O 


tf 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  161 

on  the  other.  The  number  of  superciliaries  varies:  the  number  5 
appears  five  times;  6,  sixteen  times;  7,  fourteen  times,  while  8  only- 
three  times.  In  two  cases  the  number  differed  on  sides  of  same 
animal:  8-7;  7-8.  A  single  specimen  showed  variation  in  the 
supraoculars.  The  subdigital  lamellae  under  the  longest  toe  varies 
from  19  to  25  as  follows.  The  number  19  appears  once;  20,  two 
times;  21,  eleven  times;  22,  sixteen  times;  23,  five  times;  24,  one 
time,  and  25,  once. 

The  character  of  the  temporals  varies  somewhat  from  that  given 
in  the  description,  but  the  condition  described  may  be  regarded  as 
typical;  the  upper  secondary  temporal  is  frequently  segmented, 
forming  two  upper  temporals,  the  posterior  part  the  larger;  the 
tertiary  temporal  may  likewise  be  divided.  Occasionally  the  second 
pair  of  transversely  widened  nuchals  is  absent  on  one  or  both  sides. 
The  relationships  of  the  frontonasal  to  the  loreal,  and  the  union  of 
the  prefrontals,  appear  to  be  constant. 

The  coloration  given  is  that  of  a  young  male,  probably  adult, 
since  the  testes  are  large.  In  younger  specimens  the  markings  are 
generally  on  the  same  plan.  There  are  markings  on  the  rostral  and 
on  the  canthus  rostralis  that  are  analogous  to  the  anterior  part  of 
the  two  lines  formed  by  the  bifurcation  of  the  median  line  in  other 
species.    The  tail  is  bluish  or  purplish  black. 

In  an  older  female  (K.U.  No.  8211),  the  dorsal  coloration  is 
grayish-olive,  and  the  dorsolateral  light  lines  are  still  more  or  less 
in  evidence  bordering  the  brown  lateral  stripe;  but  practically  no 
trace  remains  of  the  narrow  brown  stripe  bordering  the  dorsolateral 
light  stripe  above,  save  a  few  brownish  flecks.  The  lateral  brown 
band  is  of  a  very  light  brown  color,  broken  up  by  diagonal  series 
of  light  greenish  dots  forming  diagonal  rows;  these  are  distinct,  low 
on  the  sides,  and  may  reach  as  far  as  the  dorsolateral  light  line; 
the  lower  lateral  light  line  is  almost  obsolete;  the  chin  and  preanal 
plates  creamy-white. 

In  a  large  male  (K.U.  8216)  the  entire  dorsal  and  lateral  sur- 
face is  dark  brown  with  a  very  large  part  of  the  scales  showing 
greenish  flecks.  On  the  sides  the  lateral  brown  band  shows  fewest 
flecks.  Lower  on  sides  the  greenish  flecks  are  arranged  in  diagonal 
rows  directed  backward;  the  head  is  greenish  to  yellowish-olive 
above,  heavily  flecked  with  brown  in  the  occipital  region,  less  so 
anteriorly;  on  the  sides  of  the  head  a  light  yellowish  color  pre- 
dominates, with  a  darker  area  behind  and  below  the  eye.  The 
labials  are  flecked  with  dull  reddish-yellow;  the  chin  and  anterior 

11—1123 


162 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


part  of  the  throat  are  immaculate  yellow ;  belly  bluish  or  greenish- 
blue. 

In  (M.C.Z.  No.  6911)  embryos  in  eggs  about  ready  for  hatching, 
the  white  dorsolateral  lines  are  seen  beginning  on  the  first  or  second 
supraoculars;  a  pair  of  elongate  light  spots  on  the  snout  simulate  the 
termination  of  a  pair  of  head  lines.  These  spots  extend  from  rostral 
along  the  anterior  part  of  the  sides  of  the  frontal ;  the  lateral  lines 
are  represented  by  a  series  of  spots  on  the  neck.  The  embryos  are 
29  to  30  millimeters  long. 

Remarks.  The  presence  of  this  species  on  the  Bermuda  Islands 
is  distinctly  puzzling.  There  are  no  near  relatives,  and  it  appears 
to  be  an  archaic  form  that  has  existed  since  Bermuda  was  connected 
with  a  former  land  mass;  or  that  reached  Bermuda  from  some  land 
that  is  no  longer  existent;  or  that  came  from  a  body  of  land  still 
existent  but  from  which  its  ancestors  have  disappeared. 

Unfortunately,  other  reptilian  contemporaries  have  not  survived 
on  Bermuda.  These,  did  they  still  exist,  might  offer  a  clue  as  to 
which  of  these  possibilities  was  most  likely.  However,  it  appears 
that  the  true  history  of  the  colonization  of  the  land,  now  Bermuda, 
is  lost  forever  in  oblivion. 

Distribution.    The  species  occurs  only  on  the  Bermuda  Islands. 


Fig.  17.   Distribution  of  Eumeces  longirostris  (Cope),  in  Bermuda  Islands. 

Locality  records: 
Bermuda  Islands:    (M.C.Z.  54)  (A.M.N.H.  37)  (U.S.N.M.  6)  (Field  Mus.  25) 
(A.N.S.P.  2) ;  Castle  Island  (M.C.Z.  30)  (K.U.  4)  (Mich.  6) ;  Ducking  Stool 
(A.N.S.P.2). 

LYNXE  GROUP 

This  group,  comprising  two  closely  related  Mexican  forms,  is 
characterized  as  follows:  A  short  median  light  line  runs  forward 
bifurcating  on  the  medial  or  anterior  part  of  the  frontal ;  and  these 
resulting  lines  reunite  on  the  frontal.    They  are  in  contact  anteriorly 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


163 


with  the  dorsolateral  light  lines  which  follow  the  third  and  fourth 
scale  rows.  A  broad  lateral  brown  stripe  present;  a  lateral  light  line 
to  groin,  bordered  below  by  a  darker  line;  indistinct  clotted  dark 
lines  on  dorsal  scales.  Tail  bluish  in  young.  Ovoviviparous.  Limbs 
small,  widely  separated  in  adults  when  adpressed.  Scale  rows,  22 
to  26.    Supraoculars  variable. 

Key  to  the  Forms 

A.    Four  supraoculars    Eumeces  lynxe  lynxe  (Wiegmann),  163 

AA.     Three  supraoculars    Eumeces  lynxe  furcirostris  (Cope),   173 


Fig.  18.    Distribution  of  members  of  the  Lynxe  group,  in  Mexico. 


Eumeces  lynxe  lynxe  (Wiegmann) 

(Plate  41,  Fig.  B;   Figs.  18,  19) 
SYNONYMY 

1828.    Scincus  quinquelineatus  var.  Wiegmann.     Isis,  1828,  p.   373. 

1834.  Euprepes  lynxe  Wiegmann.  Herpet.  Mexicana,  1934,  pp.  36-37  (type  description;  type 
locality,  "Specimena  nostra  prope  Chico  invenit  Depp");  Arch,  fur  Naturg.,  Jahr.  1, 
Band   2,   1835,  p.  288;    Carman,  Bull.  Essex  Inst.,  XVI,   1884,  p.   15   (under  Eumeces). 

1839.  Plestiodon  quinquelineatum  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  pp.  707-708 
(part.)  {Euprepes  lynxe  made  a  synonym  of  quinquelineatum  Linnaeus);  Duges,  La 
Naturaleza,  (1),  I,  1870,  p.  144;?  Gravenhorst,  Nova  Act.  Acad.  Leop.-Carol.,  XXIII, 
1851,  pp.  350-354  (part.). 

1845.    Plestiodon  Bellii  Gray.     Cat.  Liz.  Brit.   Mus.,  1845,  p.  92  (type  locality  unknown). 

1864.  Eumeces  lynxe  Peters.  Monatsb.  Acad.  Wiss.  Berlin,  1864,  p.  484;  Bocourt,  Miss. 
Sci.  Mexique,  Livr.  VI,  1879,  pp.  437-439,  pi.  XXII  E,  figs.  9,  9a,  9b,  9c,  9d  (de- 
scription of  specimens  from  Guanajuato,  Mex.);  Sumichrast,  La  Naturaleza,  (1),  VI, 
1882-1884,  pp.  31-45  (reports  the  species  common  up  to  3,000  meters  on  Orizaba; 
perhaps  this  is  furcirostris);  Cope,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.,  Phila.,  XXII,  1885,  p.  170 
(key   characters);    Gunther,    Biol.    Cent.    Amer.,   Itept.   Batr.,    18S5,    p.    32;    Boulenger, 


364  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Cat.   Liz.   Brit.    Mus.,   Ill,   1887,   p.    380   (part.)    (specimen   from   Jalapa) ;    Cope,   Bull. 

U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  32,  1887,  p.  46;    Garman,  Bull.  Essex  Inst.,  XIX,  1887,  p.   129; 

TJuges,   La    Naturaleza,    (2),    I,    1889,   p.    282    (Aztec   name);    Cope,    Rept.    U.    S.    Nat. 

Mus.,    1898,    (1900),    p.    630    (key);     Duges,    La    Naturaleza,    (2),    II,    1900,    p.    484 

(Guanajuato);    Gadow,  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1905,  pp.  218-219  (habits;   also  listed 

as  Eumeces  lynce,  typ.  error,  p.   233). 
71865.  Plistodon  lynxe  Cope.     Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1865,  pp.   185-198  (this  specimen, 

"Tableland  and  Southern  mountains  of  Mexico,  Doctor  Sartorius  Coll.,"  is  referred  by 

Cope   [1887]   to  E.  brevirostris ;  a  specimen  of  E.  copei  in  the  National  Museum,  No. 

7037,  with  only  "Mexico"  as  a  locality  label,  may  be  the  specimen  referred  to). 
1887.    Eum-cces  bellii  Boulenger.     Cat.  Liz.   Brit.   Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  pp.   378-379. 
1931.    Eumeces  lynxae  Hartweg.     Copeia,  No.   2,   1931,  p.   61   (ovoviviparity). 

History.     The  first  specimen  of  Eumeces  lynxe  reached  Europe 

in  a  collection  made  by  Ferdinand  Deppe  in  Mexico.    The  specimen 

was  mentioned  by  Dr.  A.  F.  Wiegmann  (Isis,  1828,  p.  373)  under 

the  designation  Scincus  quinquelineatus  var.  Schneid.  as  follows: 

"Aus  der  Familie  der  Scincoiden  erhielten  mir  die  von  Schneider  (Hist. 
Amphib.,  II,  p.  201)  beschriebene  Varietat  des  Scincus  quinquelineatus  mit  dem 
blauen  Schwanze  velche  von  den  Einwohnern  Lynxe  genannt  und  wegen  ihres 
vermeintlichen  giftes  sehr  gefiirchtet.  Auch  Hernandez*  erwiihnt  ihrer  bereits 
unter  dem  nam  en  Tetzauhcoatl." 

In  1834  Wiegmann,  while  dealing  with  the  entire  known  Mexican 
herpetological  fauna,  described  this  specimen  under  the  name  of 
E  [uprepis]  lynxe,  failing  to  associate  the  form  with  Eumeces,  the 
newly  created  genus  of  his  own  making  in  this  same  work. 

Peters  (1864)  appears  to  have  been  the  first  to  place  the  form  in 
its  correct  genus.  Cope  (1865)  used  the  generic  name  Plistodon; 
Bocourt  (1879)  refers  the  species  again  to  the  genus  Eumeces;  and 
most  authors  have  subsequently  referred  the  species  to  this  genus. 

The  form  of  the  specific  name  of  the  species  has  been  changed  by 
Hartweg  (1931)  from  lynxe  to  lynxae,  which  seems  to  be  incorrect. 
The  name  is  presumably  (vide  Wiegmann  [1828])  the  Latin  equiva- 
lent of  native  Mexican  for  the  large  wild  cats;  and  the  scientific 
name  based  on  the  classic  Latin  word  lynx,  if  placed  in  the  genitive, 
would  be  lyncis.    This  change  is  not  necessary. 

Gray  (1845)  described  Plestiodon  Bellii  from  a  specimen  from  an 
unknown  locality.  Boulenger  (1887)  maintained  it  as  a  separate 
species,  apparently  on  the  basis  of  its  having  a  large  first  supraocular 
touching  the  frontal,  and  having  the  sixth  and  seventh  labials  of 
equal  size.  H.  W.  Parker,  of  the  British  Museum,  has  recently  had 
the  great  kindness  to  examine  the  type  to  see  if  aught  could  be 
determined  regarding  its  origin,  and  to  compare  it  with  Eumeces 
lynxe.    He  writes: 

*  "Nova  Plantarum  Animalium  et  Mineralium  Mexicanorum  Historia.  Tractatus  tertius," 
by  Francisco  Hernandez.     (Rome,   1651.)     Under  the  Aztec  name,  tetzauhcoatl. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  165 

"Nothing  whatever  is  known  of  the  locality  of  the  specimen;  it  was  for- 
merly in  Thomas  Bell's  collection  and  most  of  the  specimens  went  to  Oxford; 
I  have  written  to  see  if  there  is  any  list  or  catalogue  in  existence.  I  am  afraid 
that,  having  no  knowledge  of  the  genus  whatever,  I  am  not  competent  to  ex- 
press any  views  as  to  its  status,  but  it  appears  to  me  to  be  very  close  to 
E.  lynxe  in  most  characters  except  that  the  first  supraocular  is  decidedly  larger 
and  in  contact  with  the  frontal." 

Mr.  Parker  has  furnished  a  photograph  of  the  type  to  me  for 
study. 

An  examination  of  the  excellent  photographs  causes  me  to  con- 
cur with  Mr.  Parker's  opinion.  In  the  material  available  to  me  of 
this  species  I  find  that  the  first  supraocular  is  variable  as  regards 
its  relation  to  the  frontal.  Specimens  having  the  two  scales  in  con- 
tact, and  others  having  them  separated,  appear  in  the  same  brood. 
Likewise,  this  same  variation  obtains  in  specimens  from  identical 
localities.  Some  of  these  show  variation  in  the  length  of  the  suture. 
In  certain  ones  it  is  considerable;  in  others  the  scales  are  in  contact 
at  a  single  point,  The  size  of  the  sixth  labial  varies  somewhat  so 
that  occasionally  it  approaches  the  seventh  in  size.  Unless  it  is 
possible  to  show  that  a  considerable  population  exists  in  which  these 
characters  are  fairly  stable,  it  seems  best  to  consider  bellii  a  syn- 
onym of  E.  lynxe. 

Boulenger  has  placed  Eumeces  furcirostris  as  a  synonym  of  lynxe, 
probably  presuming  it  to  be  merely  an  abnormal  specimen.  The 
type  has  a  divided  frontal,  and  only  three  supraoculars,  and  these 
characters  were  used  by  Cope  to  separate  it  from  lynxe.  The  char- 
acter of  the  reduced  number  of  supraocular  plates,  appearing  as  it 
does  in  the  southern  part  of  the  range,  seems  to  warrant  the  reten- 
tion of  Cope's  species  as  a  subspecies  of  lynxe.  I  believe  the  division 
of  the  frontal  to  be  an  abnormality,  since  I  have  found  this  con- 
dition on  several  occasions  in  other  species  of  the  genus:  viz.  lati- 
ceps,  fasciatus,  and  skiltonianus,  and  it  does  not  occur  in  a  second 
specimen  of  furcirostris  examined. 

Gadow  (1905,  pp.  128,  195)  mentions  Eumeces  fuscirostris  (sic). 
It  would  appear  that  he  really  meant  brevirostris,  since  he  later 
omits  fuscirostris  and  records  brevirostris  from  the  same  locality 
and  elevation. 

The  type  locality  of  Wiegmann's  species  is  "prope  Chico."  This 
place  name  probably  refers  to  a  locality  of  this  name  either  in 
Vera  Cruz  or  Pueblo;  both  are  near  the  old  Camino  Real  between 
Mexico  Citv  and  Vera  Cruz. 


166 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Diagnosis.  A  medium-sized  species  with  limbs  touching  in  young, 
widely  separated  in  adults  when  adpressed.  A  median  light  line, 
extending  to  the  shoulders  or  somewhat  beyond,  bifurcates  on  the 
frontal,  the  parts  joining  again  on  the  rostral;  the  dorsolateral 
light  lines  distinct,  usually  retained  in  adults  (but  may  be  lost  in 
old  males),  beginning  on  rostral,  and  extending  to  base  of  tail, 
usually  lessening  in  distinctness  posteriorly;  a  lateral  light  line 
begins  on  rostral  and  continues  to  groin;  one  postmental;  no  post- 
nasal; anterior  superciliary  may  or  may  not  touch  the  prefrontal; 
first  supraocular  either  in  contact  or  not,  with  the  frontal;  four 
supraoculars. 


Fig.  19.  Eumeces  lynxe  lynxe  (Wiegmann).  A.M.N.H.  No.  12835; 
Hidalgo,  Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  9.3  mm.;  width,  8  mm. 

Description  oj  species.  Rostral  moderate,  the  portion  visible 
above  normal;  supranasals  large,  widely  separating  the  frontonasal 
from  the  rostral;  frontonasal  much  broader  than  long,  touching 
anterior  loreal  laterally  and  usually  forming  a  suture  with  the 
frontal  (sometimes  not)  ;  prefrontals  rather  small,  usually  sepa- 
rated, touching  both  loreals  laterally  and  very  broadly  in  contact 
with  the  first  supraocular;  frontal  not  noticeably  elongated,  but 
distinctly  longer  than  its  distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  some- 
what narrowed  at  a  point  not  far  from  the  posterior  end,  after 
which  it  widens  slightly,  touching  three  supraoculars  laterally 
(sometimes  only  two,  in  which  case  the  most  anterior  is  excluded) ; 
frontoparietals  more  or  less  rectangular,  forming  a  moderate  median 
suture;  interparietal  about  a  third  longer  than  wide,  not  inclosed 
by  the  parietals;  two  pairs  of  nuchals,  the  anterior  of  same  trans- 
verse length  but  distinctly  wider  than  posterior. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  167 

Nasal  diagonally  placed,  rectangular,  twice  as  long  as  high;  the 
nostril  directed  down  and  forward,  posterior  to  the  suture  of  the 
first  labial  with  the  rostral;  no  postnasal;  two  loreals,  the  anterior 
higher,  touching  two  anterior  labials;  posterior  loreal  about  as  long 
as  high,  touching  the  second  and  third  labials,  but  widely  separated 
from  the  fourth;  two  presuboculars;  six  superciliaries  (rarely  five  or 
seven),  first  relatively  small,  scarcely  of  greater  bulk  than  second, 
usually  excluded  from  contact  with  the  prefrontal;  four  supra- 
oculars, the  anterior  variable  in  size  and  in  its  relation  to  the  frontal ; 
three  postsuboculars;  seven  upper  labials,  the  last  usually  largest, 
separated  from  auricular  opening  by  a  curved,  elongate  postlabial; 
this  separated  from  ear  by  two  minute  scutes;  subocular  (fifth 
labial)  somewhat  longer  than  high,  somewhat  higher  posteriorly; 
first  labial  largest  of  the  first  four,  not  abruptly  elevated  posteriorly; 
the  fourth  smallest ;  four  temporals,  the  primary  about  as  large  as 
those  of  the  second  series,  forming  a  moderate  suture  with  the 
lower,  excluding  the  seventh  labial  from  the  upper  secondary;  the 
tertiary  is  narrow,  elongated,  curved,  entering  the  auricular  border; 
labial  border  of  mental  more  extensive  than  that  of  rostral;  a 
single  postmental;  three  typical,  paired  chinshields,  followed  by  an 
elongate  postgenial  shield,  bordered  on  its  inner  anterior  edge  by  a 
scale  wider  than  long;  six  lower  labials;  eye  length  equal  to  the 
distance  from  nostril;  palpebral  scales  in  contact  with  the  super- 
ciliaries save  for  one  or  two  small  intercalated  scales  at  anterior  and 
posterior  corners;  a  small  preocular  and  two  small  postoculars; 
three  or  four  enlarged  opaque  scales  on  the  lower  eyelid  separated 
from  the  subocular  labial  by  two  rows  of  granular  scales. 

Ear  opening  small,  rounded,  surrounded  by  about  16  scales; 
usually  a  single,  rounded,  preauricular  lobule,  or  one  large  and  one 
small  one;  scales  of  the  two  median  dorsal  series  transversely 
elongated  anteriorly,  all  with  curving  posterior  edges,  not,  or  only 
slightly,  larger  than  adjoining  rows;  scales  on  sides  of  body  and 
narrow  part  of  neck  parallel ;  scales  on  sides  behind  arm  not  strongly 
diagonal;  scale  rows  around  neck  immediately  behind  ear,  28; 
around  narrow  part  of  neck,  25;  behind  arm,  29;  about  middle  of 
body.  24;  about  base  of  tail,  15  to  17;  from  occiput  to  above  anus, 
60  to  63 ;  scales  on  sides  and  abdomen  not  or  only  slightly  smaller 
than  the  dorsal  series;  nine  or  ten  scales  about  arm  insertion; 
fourteen  about  insertion  of  leg;  eight  preanal  scales,  the  two  median 
much  enlarged,  those  adjoining  laterally  decreasing  in  size,  the  outer 
ones  smaller  but  overlapping  the  inner;  the  scales  under  the  tail 


168  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

distinctly  widened;  tail  only  a  little  longer  than  head  and  body; 
limbs  small,  widely  separated  when  adpressed;  lamellar  formula  of 
fingers:  5;  8;  11;  10;  8;  of  toes:  5;  9;  11;  12;  8.  A  series  of  five 
enlarged  scutes  border  the  heel ;  three  or  four  enlarged  tubercles  on 
posterior  part  of  the  sole. 

Color.  Above  generally  brownish  olive  with  (usually)  a  series 
of- six  very  narrow  lines  of  small  blackish  dots;  somewhat  posterior 
to  the  shoulders  a  median  light  line  bordered  with  brown  begins  and 
continues  forward,  growing  more  distinct;  on  the  anterior  or  medial 
part  of  the  frontal  it  bifurcates  and  the  branches  pass  to  the  pre- 
frontals, where  they  unite  with  the  dorsolateral  light  lines  and 
continue  to  rostral;  the  dorsolateral  light  (whitish  or  cream)  line 
passes  back  along  the  side,  on  the  edges  of  the  third  and  fourth 
scale  rows;  a  broad  brown  lateral  stripe  from  in  front  of  eye  to 
tail,  slightly  wider  on  neck,  where  it  involves  the  upper  edge  of 
ear,  but  continues  as  a  stripe  of  uniform  width  the  length  of  the 
body,  covering  the  whole  of  the  sixth  scale  row  and  half  of  the  two 
scale  rows  adjoining;  this  stripe  bordered  above  by  the  dorsolateral 
light  line,  and  below  by  a  lateral  light  line;  latter  begins  on  rostral 
and  continues  to  groin,  where  it  stops  or  is  indistinctly  continued 
on  the  front  of  femur;  the  lateral  line  is  bordered  below  by  a  very 
narrow  indistinct  darker  line,  below  which  the  color  merges  into 
the  dull  bluish-gray  of  the  abdomen;  chin  and  lower  labials  cream; 
a  cream  or  whitish  area  on  breast;  tail  an  indefinite  bluish-gray; 
the  dark  color  of  the  back  continues  some  distance  on  tail,  behind 
which  indistinct  flecks  can  be  observed.  Each  scale  on  side  of  tail 
has  a  darker  area;  anal  scales  and  the  median  ventral  subcaudals 
of  lighter  color,  usually  of  a  shade  of  lavender;  head  slightly  more 
brownish  than  back,  irregularly  flecked  with  darker. 

Variation.  Seventy-eight  specimens  of  this  species  have  been 
available  for  study,  representing  localities  from  a  considerable  part 
of  its  known  range.  By  far  the  largest  number  of  these  specimens 
are  in  the  Museum  of  Comparative  Zoology  at  Harvard,  collected 
in  Guerrero  and  San  Miguel,  Hidalgo,  by  W.  M.  Mann;  and  in  the 
Alvarez  Mountains,  San  Luis  Potosi,  by  Edw.  Palmer  and  W.  W. 
Brown. 

The  number  of  scale  rows  about  the  body  and  neck  varies  as 
follows:  Behind  ear,  27  to  32;  about  more  constricted  portion  of 
neck,  23  to  26,  with  25  occurring  twice  as  frequently  as  any  other 
number  (one  specimen  has  29  rows) ;  about  middle  of  body,  22  to 
26,  with  26  occurring  once,  25,  three  times,  24,  71  times,  23,  once, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


169 


H 

<» 

H 

!S 

Si 
^^ 

eo 
<u 

<» 

s 

o 

co 

CI 
0) 


CN 

W 

SJcN 

o 

a 

P 

•o 

-i— 

■>»<      o: 

a 

oc 

N 

t» 

CO 

t* 

-d< 

<H 

^ 

CN 

oc 

Ifl 

CN 

SI  CO 

oc 

CN 

■* 

oo 

a 

c 

oo 

CO 

oo 

CO 

* 

CN 

CO 

•H 

>-; 

._:oa 

S~ 

CC 

•* 

m 

CO 

CO 

<n 

r<°°ic 

co 

0! 

c 

■>* 

00 

c 

c 

t^ 

CO 

oc 

CO 

a 

CO 

»H 

rt 

■_!« 

Srt 

CN 

CN 

CN 

(joo 

L  '  00 

•* 

c 

Ol 

c 

<* 

00 

00 

a- 

>0 

CN 

t^ 

^ 

t^ 

co 

CC 

^H 

S^1 

CC 

iC 

a- 

a- 

sico 

dSt 

CN 

1^ 

a- 

co 

as 

Oi 

oc 

t^ 

CN 

10 

CC 

■H 

co 

^ 

^ 

.-JCO 

g.o 

t~ 

sipq 

o 

t- 

i0 

X 

OC 

t^ 

l> 

CO 

dSo 

to 

CO 

■"* 

" 

CO 

X 

sici 

a 

CC 

».o 

20 

oc 

CC 

CN 

CC 

CO 

C«o 

■c 

■"* 

co 

*5 

CN 

t^ 

CN 

si  co 

r,'CO 

Tf 

■x 

-t 

t- 

cr 

»0 

»^ 

CC 

CO 

lO 

t> 

CO 

^" 

~" 

£~ 

CN 

CC 

t^ 

t^ 

CN 

•H 

si-H 
Uco 

^H 

cn 

IC 

z 

t^ 

oc 

LO 

„ 

ic: 

CO 

m 

t^ 

CN 

S~ 

»C 

CO 

si-* 

dog 

oc 

LO 

CC 

CC 

t~ 

10 

c 

Tj 

lO 

1                 Tt 

•H 

CN 

" 

^ 

■m  > 

a 

Srt 

CN 

t~ 

t^ 

CN 

sio 

dSg 

CO 

CN 

■-0 

CC 

X 

0-) 

Tt> 

3            -t 

CN 

~2> 

. 

^M 

>o 

JV^ 

si » 

d3§ 

iC 

CM 

00 

ir. 

•o 

CN 

00 

CT 

T)> 

J              CO 

r-r-l  > 

. 

•^-"  _■ 

s 

oo 

t 

CO 

u: 

T(< 

sa't^ 
•  cn 

o3  § 

(C 

c 

oc 

rv; 

>* 

i-0 

O 

cC 

X 

CO 

J             CN 

co 

■_:>■*  ^ 

) 

£~ 

-*- 

c 
a 

6 

a 

"a 

u 

c 

i 

a 
> 

t 

"5 

j 

a 

* 

J- 

> 

c 

c 

a 
c 

c 

a 
C 

9      "c 

« 

a 

I 

d 

o 

1-S 

-*- 

4- 

4- 

a 

-C 

-t- 

b 

D       1 

01 

-     — 
CD    2 

3  s  &• 

c 

~ 

c 

c 

5 
C 

— 
■r 

-4- 

s 

- 

•c 

§ 

£ 

a 
/ 

c 
a 

£ 

a 

c 
a 

C 

a 

* 

< 

« 

c 

p- 

C 

Ft 

1 

? 

o 


o 


o 

Oi 


00 

o 
c» 


o 

o 

C3S 


O 


Z-6 

3   as 
CC 


s 


m  > 


i—i   - 

O 

O  P- 


- 

0> 

■ 

— 

tn 

- 

:. 

3 

>^ 

61 

— 

g 

c 

u 

CO 

- 

.= 

U 

r/1 

'-.I 

: 

51 

Cm 

3 

r 

o 

<M 

- 

>> 

— 

J 

rH 

.- 

"ti 

n 

a 

-; 

r- 

I 

<M 

■a 

H     tOTj 


170  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

and  22,  twice.  The  upper  labials  are  seven,  save  in  one  specimen 
with  six  on  each  side,  and  one  with  a  formula  of  seven-eight.  The 
seventh  (or  last)  of  the  series  is  invariably  the  largest,  but  the  sixth 
often  approaches  it  in  size.  Two  pairs  of  nuchals  are  especially 
constant;  only  one  exception,  this  having  a  single  pair,  was  noted. 
The  single  postmental  is  invariably  present,  and  the  postnasal  in- 
variably absent.  The  superciliaries  are  usually  six,  the  numbers 
five  or  seven  rarely  occurring.  The  relation  of  the  frontonasal  to 
the  frontal  is  quite  variable.  They  touch  in  46  specimens,  and  are 
separated  in  32.  The  exclusion  of  the  first  supraocular  from  the 
frontal  occurs  in  13  specimens;  in  three  of  these,  it  was  true  on  one 
side  only.  This  variation  occurs  more  frequently  in  specimens  from 
Guerrero,  Hidalgo,  but  it  is  not  constant.  The  number  of  lamellae 
under  the  fourth  toe  varies  from  eleven  to  fourteen,  in  the  following 
order  of  frequency:  14,  13,  11,  12,  the  last  number  being  three  times 
as  frequent  as  any  of  the  others.  A  single  specimen  has  15-16 
lamellae.  The  number  of  scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus  usually 
60  to  63,  occurring  in  the  following  order  of  frequency:  60,  63, 
61,  62,  the  latter  two  numbers  slightly  more  numerous  than  the  for- 
mer two.  One  specimen  has  65,  while  seven  have  only  59.  The 
parietal  is  never  inclosed.  The  first  superciliary  varies  greatly  in 
its  relationship  with  the  prefrontal,  being  in  contact  in  about  47 
percent  of  the  cases  and  separated  in  53  percent.  The  frontonasal 
is  invariably  in  contact  with  the  loreals.  The  number  of  pre- 
suboculars  was  constantly  two;  the  usual  number  of  postsuboculars 
is  3-3,  with  3-4,  and  4-4  occurring  rarely.  The  character  of  the 
temporals  is  remarkably  constant.  The  primary  is  always  large 
and  invariably  touching  the  lower  secondary.  Usually  there  is  a 
single  anterior  postlabial  followed  by  a  pair  of  small  scales. 

The  ground  color  varies  in  the  adult  from  a  bronze  to  chocolate, 
or  olive-brown.  Usually  dark  areas,  on  the  scales  of  the  six  dorsal 
rows,  form  indistinct  dotted  longitudinal  lines;  the  two  median, 
where  they  border  the  median  light  line  anteriorly,  may  join  and 
form  continuous  lines.  The  dorsolateral  light  lines  vary  from 
greenish-white  to  yellow-cream.  In  old  specimens  they  may  be 
grayish  or  even  tan,  and  usually  less  distinct  posteriorly,  but  rarely 
becoming  completely  lost  posteriorly.  The  dorsolateral  line  occupies 
the  outer  half  of  the  third  scale  row  and  a  small  adjoining  part  of 
the  fourth  row;  the  brown  lateral  stripe  is  always  separated  from 
its  fellow  by  six  complete  scale  rows  and  the  edges  of  the  adjoining 
rows. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  171 

In  two  specimens,  19083  and  19087,  M.C.Z.,  practically  all  trace 
of  the  median  line  is  wanting,  as  well  as  the  bifurcating  lines  on  the 
head.  No.  19087  is  light  brown,  the  scales  not  showing  the  dotted 
black  lines.  The  head  is  colored  like  the  body;  the  lateral  stripe 
is  dark  chocolate  brown  and  very  distinct,  but  the  light  stripes 
normally  bordering  it  are  scarcely  discernible.  No.  19083  is  olive 
in  color,  the  dotted  lines  dimly  visible  on  the  back.  Other  large 
specimens  from  the  same  locality  have  the  light  lines  more  or  less 
distinct. 

The  tails  are  usually  grayish  or  bluish  or  bluish-gray.  The 
brown  stripe  is  continued  a  greater  or  less  distance  on  its  sides. 
The  under  side  of  the  tail,  in  preserved  specimens,  is  very  often 
lavender  in  color  (possibly  pinkish  in  life).  In  the  young  the  light 
stripes  are  more  distinct  anteriorly.  Only  rarely  can  the  median 
line  be  traced  back  past  the  middle  of  the  body,  and  it  appears 
never  to  be  very  distinct  past  the  shoulders. 

The  head  is  dark  brown  to  blackish.  The  forking  lines  which 
begin  on  the  frontal  and  join  the  dorsolaterals  on  the  prefrontals 
may  sometimes  be  very  indistinct  even  in  very  young  specimens 
(26  mm).  Usually,  though,  they  are  very  distinct,  the  separation 
beginning  about  midway  on  the  frontal. 

The  upper  part  of  the  ear  is  not  involved  in  the  lateral  light  line. 
In  older  specimens,  the  forking  line  is  the  first  part  of  the  median 
line  to  disappear,  but  occasionally  it  is  retained  in  fully  adult 
specimens  (50  to  60  mm.). 

The  minimum  size  of  the  young  when  born  is  26  to  27  millimeters ; 
the  largest  specimens  seen,  a  male  and  female,  measure  70  milli- 
meters. In  the  very  young  the  limbs  when  adpressed  touch  or 
overlap  one  or  two  millimeters.  In  old  adults  they  are  separated  by 
as  much  as  15  millimeters. 

Remarks.  Hartweg  (1931)  has  reported  on  presumed  ovovivi- 
parity  in  the  species.  In  the  material  examined  I  found  developing 
embryos  in  M.C.Z.  numbers  19082,  11318,  11324,  11325,  11328, 
11323,  and  11331.  Ovoviviparity  would  appear  to  be  the  normal 
method  of  reproduction  in  this  species. 

An  attempt  to  locate  definitely  the  type  locality  Chico  has  not 
been  successful.  There  are  villages  of  this  name  in  Jalisco,  near 
Mascota,  in  the  district  of  Tepexi,  Puebla,  near  Irapuato,  Guana- 
juato, and  villages  named  El  Chico  near  Jalapa,  Vera  Cruz,  near 
Autlan,  Jalisco,  and  near  Coahuayana,  Michoacan.  One  would 
presume  that  the  one  in  Puebla,  not  far  from  the  Mexico  City  -  Vera 


172  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Cruz  highway,  or  that  in  Vera  Cruz,  might  be  the  locality  mentioned 
by  Wiegmann. 

The  native  Mexican  name  in  Guanajuato  is  Agujilla.  I  collected 
about  Santa  Rosa  where  Duges  obtained  specimens,  but  neither 
here  or  elsewhere  in  Mexico  did  Hobart  Smith  or  I  find  specimens  of 
the  species.  The  small  skinks  are  regarded  as  deadly  by  the  people 
near  Santa  Rosa,  while  many  other  lizards  were  said  to  be  harmless. 

The  relationship  of  this  subspecies  is  nearest  to  lynxe  furcirostris; 
both  are  apparently  aberrant  members  of,  or  related  to,  the  Brevi- 
lineatus  group,  differing  in  certain  characters  of  markings  and  squa- 
mation,  and  differing  especially  in  their  mode  of  reproduction. 

Distribution.  Eumeces  lynxe,  a  high  mountain  or  plateau  form, 
occupies  a  considerable  portion  of  the  southern  plateau  region.  It 
probably  does  not  reach  the  western  and  southern  limits  of  the 
plateau  on  the  Pacific  side.  However,  there  are  certain  questionable 
records  of  the  species  in  southern  Jalisco,  or  Colima,  and  in  Guerrero. 

These  two  records,  "Nevado  de  Colima,"  and  "Omilteme,  Sierra 
Madre,  west  of  Chilpancingo,  Guerrero"  of  Gadow  (1905),  may  be 
questioned,  on  the  presumption  that  the  material  was  identified  in- 
correctly. It  is  possible  that  the  "Nevado  de  Colima"  specimens 
are  now  represented  in  the  British  Musuem  collection  by  a  specimen 
identified  as  brevirostris,  labeled  "Nevada  Camp"  Gadow.  I  can 
find  no  trace  of  the  Omilteme  specimen. 

The  British  Museum  has  two  specimens  identified  as  lynxe  from 
"Tauvitavo,  Michoacan,  8,000  feet."  Neither  the  "Directorio  Gen- 
eral de  Correos  y  Telegrafos,"  nor  any  recent  map  I  have  consulted, 
gives  Tauvitavo  as  a  place  name  of  settlement  or  mountain.  It  is 
possible  that  it  is  a  misspelling  (or  misreading  of  a  label)  for 
Tarecuato,  Tarejero,  Taretaro,  Tarietaro,  or  Tarimoro,  all  place 
names  in  Michoacan.  The  eastern  part  of  Michoacan  is  within  the 
presumed  range  of  the  species.  The  species  is  definitely  known 
from  the  states  of  Guanajuato,  Hidalgo,  and  San  Luis  Potosi.  The 
records  for  Vera  Cruz  probably  refer  (at  least  for  the  most  part) 
to  Eumeces  lynxe  furcirostris  (Cope). 

Locality  records: 

Vera  Cruz  :    Alpine  Region  of  Orizaba  to  3,000  meters    (Sumichrast  1882) ; 

Jalapa    (several  specimens.     Boulenger   [1887].     Possibly  certain  of  these 

should  be  referred  to  E.  lynxe  furcirostris). 
San  Luis  Potosi:   Alvarez  Mountains  (M.C.Z.  11) ;  Alvarez  (M.C.Z.  28). 
Michoacan:    "Tauvitavo,"  8,000  feet  (British  Mus.)   (Doubtful). 
Guerrero:  "Omilteme,"  Sierra  Madre  west  of  Chilpancingo,  8,000  feet  (Gadow, 

1905)   (Doubtful). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  173 

Hidalgo:   Zacualtipan  (A.X.S.P.  1) ;  San  Miguel  (M.C.Z.  6) ;  'Valosea'  ?  (M.C.Z. 

1);    Guerrero    (M.C.Z.    21)    (A.M.N .H.    4)     (Mich.   4    with    6    embryos); 

"Hidalgo"  (A.  Duges  Mus.  1). 
Puebla:    Zacatlan  (A.M.N.H.  1). 

Guanajuato:    Santa  Rosa  (A.  Duges  Mus.  2);  "Guanajuato"  (Bocourt,  1879). 
Indeterminate  records:    Mexico   (U.S.N.M.  1)    (identified  as  E.  Bellii) ;  near 

Chico  (type  locality;  1,  Wiegmann). 

Eumeces  lynxe  furcirostris  (Cope) 

(Figs.   18,  20) 
SYNONYMY 

ISSu.  Eumeces  furcirostris  Cope.  Proc.  Amer.  Phil.  Soc,  XXII,  Jan.  to  Oct.,  1885,  pp.  169- 
170  (printed  Mar.  7,  1885)  (typo  description;  type  locality  not  stated);  idem,  p.  380 
(Jalapa  named  as  the  type  locality);  Giinther,  Biol.  Cent.  Amer.,  Rept.  Batr.,  Oct., 
1885,  p.  33;  Ferrari-Perez,  Proc.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  IX,  1886,  p.  196  (state  of  Puebla; 
Teziutlan);  Cope,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.  No.  32,  1887,  p.  169;  and  Rep.  U.  S.  Nat. 
Mus.,  1898  (1900),  p.  630  (Key). 

1887.    Eumeces  lynxe  Boulenger.     Cat.   Liz.   Brit.   Mus.,   Ill,   1887,  p.   380   (part.). 

History.  The  type  specimen  was  collected  at  Jalapa,  Vera  Cruz, 
by  Doctor  Flohr,  and  originally  formed  a  part  of  the  collection  of 
the  Comision  Geographica,  part  of  which  was  later  obtained  by  the 
Academy  of  Natural  Sciences  of  Philadelphia.  The  specimen,  ab- 
normal in  the  character  of  the  divided  frontal,  was  described  by 
Cope  (1885),  who  at  the  same  time  published  in  the  description  a 
key  to  the  known  Mexican  species  of  the  genus.  The  type  is  now 
No.  11327  in  the  collection  of  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences  of 
Philadelphia. 

Two  years  later  Boulenger  (1887)  placed  furcirostris  in  the  syn- 
onymy of  Eumeces  lynxe  (Wiegmann) .  In  the  description  given 
for  lynxe  he  notes  "four  supraoculars,  second  and  third  in  contact 
with  the  frontal,  first  very  small,  sometimes  united  with  the  first 
supraciliary;"  evidencing  the  presence  of  this  form  in  the  Hoege 
series  of  specimens  in  the  British  Museum.  It  seems  that  since  in  the 
northern  part  of  the  range  the  number  of  supraoculars  in  lynxe  is 
fixed  at  four  while  in  the  southeastern  part  of  the  range  the  number 
is  three,  it  is  well  to  recognize  the  latter  population  as  representing 
a  subspecies  rather  than  a  species,  since  there  is  evidence  that  the 
characters  overlap,  in  a  part  of  the  range,  as  suggested  by  the 
British  Museum  series. 

Diagnosis.  Similar  to  Eumeces  lynxe  lynxe  in  having  a  dorso- 
lateral and  lateral  light  line,  with  a  short  median  line  from  the 
shoulders  bifurcating  on  the  frontal  and  joining  the  dorsolateral 
lines  near  the  tip  of  the  snout;  general  character  of  scales  similar 
to  lynxe  lynxe  save  that  there  are  three  supraoculars,  two  touching 


174 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


the  frontal,  and  the  first  superciliary  is  larger  and  invariably  in 
contact  with  the  prefrontal. 

Description  of  subspecies.  (From  type  specimen,  No.  11327, 
A.N.S.P.  collection;  collected  by  Doctor  Flohr,  Jalapa,  Vera  Cruz, 
Mexico.)  Similar  in  general  contour  and  markings  to  Eumeces 
lynxe  lynxe.  The  part  of  rostral  visible  from  above  distinctly  less 
than  the  frontonasal;  supranasals  moderately  large,  in  contact 
mesially,  larger  than  nasals;  frontonasal  very  broad,  broadly  in 
contact  with  the  anterior  loreal;  prefrontals  large,  fused  (abnor- 
mally) to  form  a  single  scale,  and  forming  sutures  with  the  fronto- 


Fig.  20.  Eumeces  lynxe  furcirostiis  (Cope).  E.H.T.  and  H.M.S.  No. 
2517,  young;  Toxtlacuaya,  Vera  Cruz,  Mexico.  A,  laterial  view  of  bead; 
B,  dorsal  view  of  head.    Actual  head  length,  5.3  mm.;  width,  4.2  mm. 

nasal,  frontal,  posterior  loreal,  first  superciliary,  anterior  loreal,  and 
the  first  supraocular,  the  length  of  sutures  in  order  named;  frontal 
segmented  transversely  (abnormally),  forming  an  obtuse  angle  an- 
teriorly, somewhat  rounded  posteriorly,  touching  two  supraoculars; 
frontoparietals  diagonally  placed,  longer  than  broad,  forming  a 
strong  median  suture ;  interparietal  broad,  short,  not  inclosed  by  the 
parietals ;  parietals  rather  narrow,  elongate ;  first  nuchals  very  large, 
their  longitudinal  width  more  than  one  and  one  half  times  that  of 
the  second  pair  (the  right  member  of  second  pair  divided,  leaving  a 
median  scale) . 

Nasal  low,  elongate,  divided  by  sutures,  the  anterior  portion  larger 
than  posterior;  nostril  directed  strongly  down  and  forward;  two 
loreals,  the  anterior  only  slightly  higher  than  posterior;  latter 
largest,  broadly  in  contact  with  two  labials,  and  forming  equal 
sutures  with  the  first  superciliary  and  the  prefrontal;  two  presub- 
oculars,  the  posterior  deeply  wedged  between  the  fourth  and  fifth 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  175 

upper  labials;  three  postsuboculars ;  three  supraoculars,  the  anterior 
very  large,  triangular;  five-six  superciliaries,  the  anterior  very  large, 
the  posterior  vertical  scale  relatively  very  small;  primary  temporal 
very  large,  not  or  but  slightly  smaller  than  the  upper  secondary,  and 
somewhat  smaller  than  the  lower  secondary,  with  which  it  forms  a 
broad  suture;  tertiary  temporal  narrow,  elongate,  separated  from 
the  ear  by  a  very  minute  scale;  seven  upper  labials,  four  preceding 
the  subocular,  of  which  the  first  is  highest  and  largest,  the  fourth 
very  greatly  reduced;  seventh  labial  largest;  postlabial,  on  the  left, 
one  very  large  diagonally-placed  scale,  separated  from  the  ear  by 
two  minute  scales;  on  right  side,  the  scale  is  much  smaller  than  on 
the  left  and  the  two  following  are  much  larger;  two  small,  very 
inconspicuous  preauricular  lobules;  six  lower  labials;  upper  median 
palpebral  scales  not  separated  from  the  superciliaries  by  granules; 
two  (three)  enlarged  scales  on  lower  eyelid,  separated  from  the 
subocular  by  two  rows  of  granules.  Mental  with  labial  border 
greater  than  that  of  rostral;  a  single  azygous  postmental;  three 
pairs  of  nearly  equal-sized  chinshields;  postgenial  relatively  small, 
bordered  on  its  inner  anterior  border  by  a  scale  much  broader  than 
long;  fourteen  scales  about  auricular  opening,  which  is  relatively 
small. 

Scales  on  body  generally  parallel,  those  on  the  dorsal  surface 
somewhat  larger  than  the  lateral  or  ventral  series;  those  of  the  two 
median  rows  slightly  larger  than  adjoining  series,  and  distinctly 
widened  transversely  in  nuchal  region;  scales  in  30  rows  behind 
ear;  around  narrow  part  of  neck,  26  rows;  in  axillary  region,  29 
rows;  about  middle  of  body,  24  rows;  about  base  of  tail,  17;  sixty- 
two  scales  in  a  row  from  occiput  to  above  vent;  tail  regenerated;  six 
preanal  scales,  the  two  median  strongly  enlarged,  the  two  outer 
small,  subequal,  the  outer  overlapping  inner;  subcaudals  very  dis- 
tinctly broadened. 

Limbs  short,  slender,  separated  by  length  of  eight  scales  when 
adpressed;  a  prominent  wrist  tubercle;  the  palm  with  a  group  of 
enlarged  scales;  lamellar  formula  of  fingers:  5;  8;  11;  9;  6.  Heel 
bordered  by  four  or  five  enlarged  padlike  scales,  the  sole  with  one 
or  two  slightly  enlarged  tubercles,  but  scales  subequal  and  slightly 
imbricate;  lamellar  formula  of  toes:  5;  9;  12;  12;  8.  The  terminal 
lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about  base  of  claws ;  eleven  scales  about 
insertion  of  arm;  a  small  area  of  granular  scales  in  axilla;  fourteen 
scales  about  insertion  of  hind  limb;  no  granular  scales  behind  in- 
sertion;  an  enlarged  scale  in  the  lateral  postanal  region,  undif- 


176  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

ferentiated  save  for  a  lighter  colored  median  area.  Pits  present  on 
scales;  in  lateral  nuchal  region,  one  or  two  pits  are  dimly  evident; 
in  axillary  region  and  posterior  humeral  region  the  pits  are  stronger, 
sometimes  four  or  five  pits  being  present  on  a  single  scale;  one  or 
two  pits  dimly  evident  on  the  lateral  body  scales,  but  on  posterior 
femoral  scales  and  on  sides  of  the  tail  in  the  anal  region  the  scales 
bear  from  three  to  eight  pits. 

Color.  Above  generally  olive  to  olive-bronze,  the  head  dark 
brown,  with  a  short  median  line  extending  from  the  scapular  region 
to  the  middle  of  the  frontal,  where  it  divides,  each  part  running 
forward  to  rostral,  inclosing  a  brown  area;  dorsolateral  light  lines 
extend  from  the  first  superciliary  back  along  side  of  head  and  body 
to  tail,  where  they  become  lost;  each  follows  the  middle  of  the  third 
scale  row  and  covers  about  half  the  scales;  both  the  median  and 
dorsolateral  lines  are  edged  anteriorly  with  deep  brown,  leaving 
anteriorly  intercalated  lines  of  ground  color;  these  dark,  bordering 
lines  scarcely  reach  the  middle  of  body  on  the  dorsal  region;  a 
clearly  defined  brown  lateral  stripe  begins  on  the  loreals  and  runs  to 
some  distance  on  the  tail,  anteriorly  involving  eye  and  upper  half 
of  ear,  and  bordered  above  by  the  dorsolateral,  and  below  by  the 
lateral,  light  lines;  lateral  line  begins  on  rostral,  follows  lower  edge 
of  upper  labials  through  lower  half  of  ear  to  insertion  of  hind  limb; 
below  this  the  color  merges  into  the  light  greenish-gray  color  of  the 
sides;  rostral  and  lower  surface  of  head  and  neck  region  light 
yellow-brown;  under  side  of  limbs  and  area  about  vent  whitish; 
fingers  and  toes  blotched  or  barred  with  silver-gray;  under  side  of 
feet  brownish;  upper  part  of  arm  and  leg  dark  brown,  sharply  de- 
limited from  the  gray  color  of  the  posterior  humeral  and  femoral 
regions  of  the  limbs. 

Variation.  The  young  specimen  (T — S.  No.  2517)  measured 
below  has  22  scale  rows,  the  frontonasal  much  broader  than  long, 
touching  the  frontal;  latter  undivided;  the  prefrontals  separated, 
distinct;  the  dorsolateral  light  lines  bluish  to  greenish-white,  the 
median  line  bifurcating  and  joining  the  dorsolaterals,  extending 
posteriorly  to  the  middle  of  the  body,  gradually  becoming  fainter 
until  it  is  lost;  very  dim  grayish  lines  begin  on  the  neck  and  border 
the  edges  of  the  first  and  second  rows;  clotted  lines  on  the  back 
scarcely  discernible;  head  blackish;  lateral  line  from  third  labial, 
involves  lower  half  of  ear,  widens  a  little  on  the  side  of  neck,  and 
continues  as  a  very  narrow  line  along  the  side,  on  the  upper  edge 
of  the  sixth  scale  row,  to  sides  of  tail,  interrupted  at  insertion  of 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


177 


Measurements  of  Eumeces  lynxe  jurcirostris  (Cope) 


Museum 

Number 

Sex 

Snout  to  vent .  . 

Tail 

Snout  to  eye.  .  . 
Snout  to  ear.  .  . 
Snout  to  foreleg 
Axilla  to  groin  . 
Postanal  width. 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Longest  toe. . .  . 
Head  length  .  .  . 
Head  width.  . .  . 
Bodv  width 


hind  limb;  soles  and  palms  dark;  chin  and  breast  cream;  ventral 
surface  bluish-gray ;  tail  ultramarine ;  adpressed  limbs  overlap  about 
one  millimeter. 

Remarks.  The  type  specimen  in  the  Philadelphia  Academy  of 
Natural  Sciences  is  still  in  good  condition.  The  extreme  tip  of  the 
tail  is  regenerated,  and  the  color  is  doubtless  somewhat  faded. 

A  very  young  specimen  collected  by  Hobart  Smith  at  Toxtlacuaya 
was  found  in  pine  forest  at  an  elevation  of  about  8,000  feet.  The 
specimen  was  routed  from  the  bark  of  a  fallen  pine  tree.  The  tail 
is  a  brilliant  blue.  This  specimen  is  figured.  It  will  be  noted  that 
the  interparietal  is  proportionately  larger  in  young  than  in  adult 
specimens. 

It  may  appear  that  this  form  has  been  retained  as  a  distinct  sub- 
species on  relatively  meager  data.  It  is  true  that  only  a  few  speci- 
mens have  reached  museums.  With  the  accumulation  of  more 
material  of  lynxe  from  Puebla  and  Vera  Cruz,  my  conclusions  as 
regards  the  distinctness  of  this  subspecies  must  either  be  corrobo- 
rated, or,  failing  to  do  so,  must  see  the  name  returned  to  the 
oblivion  of  synonymy. 

Distribution.  This  subspecies  is  found  in  southern  Hidalgo, 
Puebla  and  Vera  Cruz.     It  is  probable  that  there  is  a  part  of  this 


12—1123 


178  The  Uniyersh   Science  Bulletin 

region  where  the  characters  of  the  two  subspecies  overlap.     (See 

Fig.  18  for  distributional  map.) 

Locality  records: 

?Hidalgo:    Zacualtipan  (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Vera    Cruz:     Jalapa    (Xalapa)     (Brit.    Mus.    several)     (A.N.S.P.    1,    type); 

Toxtlacuaya,  near  Las  Vigas,  Vera  Cruz  (Taylor-Smith  1). 
Puebla:   Teziutlan  (Ferrari-Perez  3). 

SUMICHRASTI  GROUP 

To  this  group  I  assign  the  single  species  Eumeces  sumichrasti 
(Cope),  known  from  southern  Mexico  and  northern  Central  Amer- 
ica. It  is  characterized  by  rather  large  size  and  is  typically  five 
lined,  save  that  the  median  light  line  bifurcates  on  the  posterior 
part  of  the  frontal  instead  of  on  the  nuchal.  Lines  lost  in  the 
adult  males.  Two  presuboculars;  tails  blue  in  young;  eight  upper 
labials;  two  pairs  of  nuchals;  postgenial  bordered  by  a  scale  longer 
than  wide  on  its  inner  margin;  scales  in  28  to  30  rows,  parallel  on 
the  sides;  many  lateral  scales  with  numerous  pits  on  posterior  bor- 
ders; subcaudals  widened.  Limbs  large,  broadly  overlapping  when 
adpressed ;  terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about  base  of  claws. 

This  group  seems  to  be  more  or  less  closely  related  to  the 
Fasciatus  group,  and  agrees  in  most  pertinent  characters  save  in  the 
character  of  the  head  lines. 

Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope) 

(Plate  12;   Figs.  21,  22,  23) 
SYNONYMY 

1866.  PUstodon  sumichrasti  Cope.  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1866,  p.  321  (type  descrip- 
tion;   type  locality  erroneously  stated  to  be  "Onzava";    Sumichrast  Coll.). 

1879.  Eumeces  sumichrasti  Bocourt.  Miss.  Sci.  Mex.,  Rept.,  Liv.  6,  1879,  p.  422;  Cope, 
Proc.  Amer.  Philos.  Soc,  XXII,  18S5,  p.  170  (Key);  Gunther,  Biol.  Cent.  Amer., 
Rept.  Batr.,  1885,  p.  32;  Boulenger,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  371  (Jalapa, 
Hoege  Coll.);  Cope,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  32,  1887,  p.  46  (Orizaba,  Vera  Cruz; 
and  Potrero,  Tierra   Caliente  of   Vera  Cruz    [Sumichrast]). 

1884.    Eumeces    (Plestiodon)   sumichrasti   Sumichrast.      La   Naturaleza,   VI,    1882-1884,    p.    40. 

?1895.  Eumeces  rovirosae  Duges.  La  Naturaleza,  (2),  II,  1895-'96  (1895),  pp.  298-299,  Lam. 
XIII  (type  description;  type  locality,  Mineral  de  Santa  Fe,  Chiapas;  Navarro  Coll.): 
idem,  1896,  p.  376;  Bouh  nger,  Zool.  Record,  1893,  pp.  1-38  (makes  rovirosae  a 
synonym  of  lynxe). 

1932.  Eumeces  schmidli  Dunn.  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  LXXXIV,  Mar.  22,  1932,  pp. 
30-31  (type  description;  type  locality  Lancetilla,  Honduras,  Rehn  Coll.;  also  lifted 
from  Tela,   Honduras). 

History.  Francis  Sumichrast,  a  noted  Swiss  collector-naturalist, 
resident  in  Mexico  from  about  1855  to  his  death  in  1882,  collected 
the  type,  the  first  known  specimen  of  this  species.  It  was  for- 
warded to  the  Smithsonian  Institution  sometime  prior  to  1866.  in 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  179 

which  year  Cope  (1866)  published  a  description.  The  type,  which 
is  still  extant  and  in  surprisingly  good  condition,  is  an  old  male 
specimen  in  which  practically  all  trace  of  juvenile  color  and  mark- 
ings has  been  lost.  The  tail  is  regenerated.  The  type  locality  was 
given  by  Cope  as  "Orizava,"  but  the  tag  bears  the  inscription 
"Potrero"  (No.  4,  F.  Sumichrast).  This  village  is  Potrero  (or  El 
Potrero)  situated  on  the  highway  between  Orizaba  and  Vera  Cruz, 
a  few  kilometers  beyond  Cordoba. 

In  1882  Sumichrast  published  some  notes  on  his  collections,  and 
states  that  he  had  found  the  species  "en  los  encinales  de  Potrero, 
cerca  de  Cordoba  a  una  altura  de  590  metros."  This  must  be  re- 
garded as  the  type  locality.  Giinther  (1885)  states  that  Sumichrast 
found  two  specimens  of  this  species  in  the  oak  woods  at  a  height 
of  1,800  feet. 

The  first  specimen  known  to  have  reached  Europe  was  a  young 
one,  collected  at  Jalapa,  by  C.  T.  Hoege.  The  specimen  became  a 
part  of  the  collections  in  the  British  Museum  and  was  available  to 
Boulenger  when  his  third  volume  of  the  catalogue  of  the  lizards  was 
written  (1886).  He  describes  the  markings  of  this  specimen,  com- 
paring it  with  lynxe:  ".  .  .  light  vertebral  line  (in  the  young) 
bifurcating  on  the  frontal,  as  in  E.  lynxe,  enclosing  a  dark  rhom- 
boidal  spot  on  the  forehead." 

In  1895  Alfredo  Duges  obtained  a  young  specimen  collected  by 
Jose  X.  Rovirosa  at  "Mineral  de  Santa  Fe  in  Chiapas."  He  de- 
scribed it  under  the  name  of  Eumeccs  Rovirosae  and  published  a 
figure  of  the  form  in  color.  This  specimen,  which  I  examined,  has 
indeed  been  "muy  mal  tratado  del  vientre,  cuello  y  ano,"  as 
suggested  by  Duges.  It  was  impossible  to  determine  the  total 
number  of  scales  round  the  body,  but,  judging  by  the  rows  on  back 
and  sides,  the  number  is  28  or  30.  He  notes  the  similarity  of  the 
markings  to  E.  lynxe,  and  likewise  notes  the  distinguishing  charac- 
ters. The  type,  unnumbered,  is  now  in  the  Alfredo  Duges  museum  in 
Guanajuato,  Mexico. 

In  1930  (July-September),  while  on  an  expedition  to  Honduras, 
two  specimens  of  this  species  were  encountered  by  J.  A.  G.  Rehn, 
one  at  Tela,  and  one  at  Lancetilla,  Honduras.  This  latter  specimen, 
now  A.N.S.P.  No.  19877,  was  made  the  type  of  a  new  species, 
Enmeces  schmidti,  by  Dunn. 

The  disposal  of  Eumeccs  rovirosae  and  Enmeces  schmidti  in  the 
synonymy  of  sumiohrasti  may  seem,  on  superficial  consideration, 
surprising,  since   both   are   five-lined   forms,  with  the  median   line 


180  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

bifurcating  on  the  posterior  part  of  the  frontal,  a  character  unique 
in  the  genus.  (In  most  forms  having  the  median  line  the  bifurcation 
is  on  the  first  nuchals  or  the  back  part  of  the  interparietal ;  in  lynxe 
and  furcirostris  the  line  bifurcates  on  the  middle  of  the  frontal.  The 
point  of  bifurcation  is  practically  constant  for  a  species,  so  far  as 
data  on  the  genus  goes.)  On  the  other  hand,  sumichrasti  is  de- 
scribed as  a  species  lacking  all  trace  of  lines  on  the  body.  Since 
many  species  (notably  those  of  the  Fasciatus  group)  tend  to  lose 
most  or  all  of  the  juvenile  pattern  of  coloration  in  the  adult  males, 
it  is  the  anticipated  condition  in  both  rovirosae  and  schmidti. 

It  has  been  most  fortunate  that  I  have  been  able  to  examine  the 
types  of  the  three  forms,  including  the  cotype  of  schmidti;  and  also, 
I  have  at  hand  a  superb  photograph  of  the  Hoege  specimen  of 
sumichrasti,  in  the  British  Museum,  which  was  kindly  prepared  for 
me  by  Mr.  W.  H.  Parker.  I  synonymize  them  for  the  following 
reasons : 

First,  the  geographical  probabilities  considered,  we  find  the  type 
locality  of  rovirosae  situated  approximately  275  miles  from  that  of 
sumichrasti;  that  of  schmidti,  approximately  650  miles.  Second,  all 
the  localities  are  at  low  elevations:  sumichrasti,  590  meters  in  forest^ 
rovirosae,  unknown  (probably  no  higher)  ;  schmidti,  coastal  plain 
rain  forest  region;  so  that  they  may  be  generally  considered  as 
lowland  forms  primarily  (one  record  for  Jalapa  may  be  higher). 
Third,  the  variation  observed  is  well  within  normal  variation  to  be 
anticipated  in  the  species.  The  table  of  measurements,  and  the 
discussion  under  variation,  will  show  more  details  of  the  similarities, 
and  the  absence  of  pertinent  characters  in  the  material  now  avail- 
able, that  would  warrant  the  retention  of  either,  even  as  subspecies. 
This  does  not,  of  course,  preclude  the  possibility  that  larger  series 
will  show  size  differences  and  possibly  other  characters  which  would 
necessitate  a  different  interpretation  of  the  status  of  either  one  or 
both  of  the  forms. 

Diagnosis.  A  large  species  of  the  genus  characterized  in  the 
young  and  middle  aged  by  the  presence  of  a  median  line  extending 
the  length  of  the  body  and  onto  tail,  bifurcating  on  the  posterior 
part  of  the  frontal;  a  dorsolateral  line  covering  the  edges  of  the 
third  and  fourth  scale  row  the  length  of  the  body,  and  a  lateral  line 
involving  the  lower  half  of  ear,  and  extending  onto  tail.  Limbs, 
large,  broadly  overlapping  in  young  and  adults;  scale  rows,  28  to 
30  about  middle  of  the  body;  no  postnasal;  one  postmental  (nor- 
mally);  seven  or  eight  upper  labials;  the  postgenial    (normally) 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


181 


bordered  medially  by  a  scale  longer  than  wide;  rostral  low;  the 
prefrontals  forming  a  suture;  seventh  labial  separated  from  upper 
secondary  temporal. 

Description  of  type.  Rostral  low,  the  portion  visible  above  only 
about  a  half  the  size  of  the  relatively  small  frontonasal;  supra - 
nasals  large,  forming  a  median  suture  somewhat  shorter  than  that 
formed  with  rostral,  their  greatest  width  about  three  fourths  their 
length;  the  frontonasal  relatively  small,  in  contact  laterally  with 
the  anterior  loreal;  prefrontals  very  large  proportionally,  apparently 
equalling  area  of  frontonasal,  forming  a  broad  suture  mesially, 
laterally  in  contact  with  two  loreals,  narrowly  with  the  first,  while 


Fig.  21.  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope).  Type,  U.S.N.M.  No.  6601; 
Potrero,  Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  16.2  mm.;  width,  15  mm.  The  depth  of  the  head  is  slightly- 
greater  than  the  drawing  shows.    Drawing  by  Dr.  Doris  Cochran. 

the  suture  with  the  second  is  three  times  as  long;  the  suture  with 
the  first  superciliary  smaller  than  that  with  the  first  supraocular; 
frontal  distinctly  shorter  than  the  distance  from  frontal  to  end  of 
snout,  reaching  only  the  rostral;  anterior  angle  of  frontal  is  very 
obtuse,  wide  anteriorly,  diminishing  in  width  gradually;  posterior 
end  slightly  rounded  rather  than  angular;  frontoparietals  abnormal; 
left  divided  into  two  parts  (nearly  into  three)  ;  right  separated  from 
frontal  and  from  left  frontoparietal  by  a  series  of  three  small  scales 
(one  expects  these  normally  absent) ;  the  interparietal  relatively 
slender,  enclosed,  narrowly,  by  the  parietals;  two  pairs  of  nuchals, 
the  posterior  edges  strongly  curving;  nasal  rather  large,  divided  by 
sutures,  the  anterior  part  strongly  triangular,  not  or  but  slightly 
larger  than  the  posterior  part;  postnasal  absent;  anterior  loreal 
about  equal  in  height  to  the  larger  posterior  loreal;  superciliaries 


182  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

9-8,  the  anterior  large,  touching  prefrontal;  four  supraoculars,  three 
touching  the  frontal;  a  relatively  large  preocular;  two  presubocu- 
lars;  two  very  small  postoculars;  four  postsuboculars.  Eight  upper 
labials,  five  preceding  the  subocular,  of  which  the  first  is  the  largest, 
but  no  higher  than  the  three  succeeding  labials;  eighth  labial  no 
higher  than  seventh,  but  distinctly  larger  than  any  other  in  series; 
primary  temporal  large;  upper  secondary  temporal  wider  posteriorly 
than  anteriorly,  lower  secondary  somewhat  fan-shaped,  touching 
the  primary;  the  tertiary  temporal  small,  separated  from  eighth 
labial  and  ear;  two  pairs  of  postlabial  scales,  each  pair  superim- 
posed, of  which  the  lower  is  larger  in  each  case;  three  preauricular 
lobules,  closely  flattened  against  the  anterior  border  of  the  ear 
opening;  mental  with  a  longer  labial  border  than  the  rostral, 
relatively  deep;  normally  a  single  postmental  (anterior  upper  parr- 
ot this  scale  in  the  type  is  abnormally  divided,  the  anterior  part  not 
touching  labials) ;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  anterior  pair  in 
contact.  The  postgenial  following  third  pair  rather  short,  longer 
than  wide,  segmented  longitudinally  on  one  side,  single  on  other; 
7-6  lower  labials. 

Scales  of  the  body  generally  uniform,  the  median  series  no  larger 
than  adjoining  scale  rows,  those  on  side  not  or  only  slightly  smaller 
than  dorsal  scales.  Scale  rows  behind  ear,  35;  around  constricted 
part  of  neck,  30;  about  axillary  region,  38;  about  middle  of  body, 
28;  six  preanal  scales,  median  pair  broadened,  the  outer  pairs  small, 
overlapping  inner;  median  subcaudals  much  wider  than  adjoining 
scales,  but  not,  or  but  slightly  more  than,  double  their  depth;  an 
area  of  small  tubercular  nonimbricating  scales  in  axilla,  a  few  of 
which  continue  above  and  slightly  anterior  to  forearm;  21  scales 
about  insertion  of  foreleg;  a  few  enlarged  tubercles  on  posterior 
edge  of  palm,  with  smaller  tubercles  intermingled;  basal  lamellae 
on  toes  padlike;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  6;  9;  13;  13;  8;  and 
6;  9;  13;  13;  9.  Formula  for  toes:  7;  11;  14;  15;  12;  and  7;  11;  14; 
17;  13.  Four  large  scales  on  heel;  outer  side  of  sole  with  large,  flat 
imbricating  scales;  inner  side  with  smaller  tubercles  and  three  of 
these  somewhat  enlarged.  Pitting  on  the  scales  is  practically  ob- 
solete. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  Generally  olive-gray,  the  scales  showing 
darker  areas,  with  a  faint  lateral  stripe  of  brown;  a  median  dorsal 
light  line  is  visible  for  a  short  distance  behind  nuchals,  but  dis- 
appears on  shoulders;  a  faint  dorsolateral  light  line  evident  on 
sides  of  neck  only;  no  evidence  of  a  lateral  line;  head  brownish- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


l>:; 


yellow,  slightly  darker  in  frontal  region,  and  browner  in  temporal 
region;  chin,  tip  of  snout,  breast,  and  under  side  of  limbs  lighter; 
tail  above  apparently  slightly  more  brownish. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope) 


Museum  . 
Number. 
Sex 


Snout  to  vent    .  . 

Tail 

Snout  to  eye. . .  . 
Snout  to  ear.  .  .  . 
Snout  to  foreleg. 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Axilla  to  groin.  . 
Width  of  head.  . 
Length  of  head .  . 
Width  of  body .  . 
Postanal  widt'-. .  . 
Longest  toe 


Type 

sumichrasti 

U.S.N.M. 

6601 


96 


0 
IS. 6 
29.5 
28 
36 
51 
15 
16.2 


14 


Type 
schmidt  i 
A.NS.P. 

19877 


48 


4.1 

10 

20 

14 

19 

22 
8.3 
9.3 
8.8 
6.2 
S 


Paratype 

schnidti 

Field  M. 

18004 

9 


64 


5.5 
12.5 

22.3 
19 
25 
36 
10 

11.5 
14 
7.6 
11.3 


Type 

rovirosae 

A.  Duges 

yg- 


26 
45 


10 
14 


Variation.  The  variations  in  color  and  markings  noted  are  those 
having  to  do  with  the  normal  color  evolution  between  young  and  old. 
The  following  description  is  drawn  from  the  young  Jalapa  speci- 
men, from  photograph;  from  the  types  of  "schmidti"  and  from  the 
type  of  "rovirosae."  The  details  are  identical  in  all.  It  will  be 
noted  that  the  types  of  "schmidti"  have  been  darkened  by  their 
preserving  fluid  (presumably  formalin),  and  the  colors  are  doubt- 
less changed  and  the  markings  somewhat  obscured. 

Color  of  young:  Ground  color  black  or  brownish-black;  a  narrow 
median  cream  or  yellowish  line  extends  the  length  of  the  body  and 
some  distance  on  the  tail;  on  the  posterior  part  of  the  frontal  it 
bifurcates,  reuniting  on  the  rostral;  a  similarly  colored  dorsolateral 
line  begins  on  the  anterior  supraocular  or  prefrontal,  extends  the 
length  of  the  body  on  the  edges  of  the  third  and  fourth  scale  rows 
to  some  distance  on  the  tail;  along  the  sides  from  the  labials  to  the 
tail  is  a  narrow  lateral  yellowish  line  involving  lower  half  of  the 
ear,  and  interrupted  by  the  insertion  of  the  hind  leg;  a  dim  post- 
femoral  light  line;  on  sides  the  ground  color  is  more  intense,  and  in 


184 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


older  specimens  becomes  a  broad,  lateral  dark-brown  stripe  from 
loreal  region  to  side  of  tail,  covering  about  two  and  one  half  scale 
rows;  the  lateral  light  line  bordered  below  by  a  narrow  dark  line 
that  merges  with  the  ground  color  of  the  abdomen.  The  tail  is  a 
brilliant  blue,  fading  to  grayish-black  in  older  specimens;  the 
abdomen  is  bluish-gray,  the  chin,  throat,  and  breast  yellowish- 
white  or  cream. 

In  older  specimens,  48  to  64  mm.,  the  ground  color  begins  to  grow 
lighter,  taking  on  a  gray-brown  color,  leaving  the  whitish  lines 
bordered  with  continuous  dark  lines;  the  ground  color  of  the  head 


Fig.  22.  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope).  Paratype,  E.  schmidti  Dunn. 
F.M.N.H.  No.  130O4;  Tela,  Honduras.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal 
view  of  head.    Actual  head  length,  11.5  mm.;  width,  10  mm. 

becomes  somewhat  spotted  with  lighter  and  darker  brown.  In  the 
old  males  the  color  becomes  more  or  less  uniform,  while  in  the 
females  (no  specimens  seen)  the  juvenile  color  pattern  is  likely  to 
be  retained  to  a  greater  degree.  The  pitting  on  scales  is  distinct, 
there  being  five  to  seven  pits  present. 

In  the  three  type  specimens  of  sumichrasti,  schmidti,  and  rovi- 
rosae,  the  following  characters  are  the  same,  save  where  variation 
is  noted.  The  variation  in  scale  rows  about  the  body  is  from  28  to 
30;  of  the  two  schmidti  specimens,  one  has  29,  one  30,  while 
sumichrasti  has  only  28;  the  rostral  is  low,  the  part  visible  above, 
small;  supranasals  invariably  in  contact;  frontonasal  broader  than 
long,   forming  contacts  with   the   anterior  loreal;   the   prefrontals 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  185 

broadly  in  contact;  supraoculars  4-4,  three  touching  frontal  (2-2  in 
rovirosae,  the  third  narrowly  separated)  ;  upper  labials  8-8  in 
sumichrasti,  8-7  or  7-7  in  schmidti,  7-7  in  rovirosae;  postnasal 
absent;  postmental  single  i  abnormal  in  paratype  of  schmidti,  being 
double)  ;  nuchals  two  pairs,  the  posterior  strongly  curving  (probably 
two  pairs  in  rovirosae;  the  specimen  is  injured)  ;  parietals  in 
sumichrasti  (type;  not  in  Jalapa  specimen)  forming  a  suture, 
separated  in  schmidti  specimens;  frontoparietals  as  large  as  pre- 
frontals or  slightly  larger;  scales  under  tail  strongly  widened; 
nasal  divided  by  sutures;  presuboculars  2-2;  postsuboculars  4-4; 
superciliaries  8-9  or  9-9;  the  temporals  in  the  specimens  of  all  agree 
save  that  in  the  type  of  schmidti  the  seventh  labial  is  in  contact 
with  the  upper  secondary  temporal,  separating  the  primary  and 
lower  secondary.  The  paratype,  however,  agrees  with  the  condi- 
tion in  the  other  specimens  of  sumichrasti;  the  lamellae  under  the 
fourth  toe  vary:  15-17  in  sumichrasti;  17-17  in  schmidti;  19-19 
in  rovirosae.  It  will  be  observed  that  none  of  the  variations  are 
of  such  a  nature  that  they  might  not  occur  in  the  same  species  in  a 
single  locality. 

Remarks.  That  a  species  so  large  and  conspicuous  should  re- 
main so  rare  in  collections  is  a  matter  of  surprise,  occurring  as  it 
does  through  so  wide  a  territory,  and  having  been  discovered  so 
early  in  the  faunistic  exploration  of  Mexico.  Little  is  known  of 
habits  save  that  it  occurs  in  forests  at  relatively  or  very  low 
elevation,  but  may  also  attain  considerable  elevation  if  the  locality 
"Jalapa"  on  the  British  Museum  specimen  is  trustworthy. 

The  single  adult  female  (schmidti)  contains  ripe  eggs  in  the 
oviducts.  No  evidence  of  developing  embryos  was  discernible  in 
one  egg  examined.    It  is  presumed  that  the  form  is  oviparous. 

Distribution.  Apparently  the  species  is  confined  to  the  lowland 
region  on  the  east  of  the  southern  part  of  the  Mexican  plateau,  and 
extending  through  the  isthmus  to  Honduras.  As  it  appears  to  be  a 
woodland  form,  it  should  be  looked  for  in  the  peninsular  area 
occupied  by  Tabasco,  Yucatan,  Campeche,  Guatemala  and  British 
Honduras.  A  specimen  in  the  British  Museum  labelled  sumichrasti, 
a  photograph  of  which  I  have,  appears  to  be  tetragrammus  or  a 
related  form,  judging  by  the  color  pattern  and  short  legs. 

Locality  records: 
Vera  Cruz:   "Encinales  de  Potrero,  cerca  de  Cordoba"  (type  locality,  U.S.N. M. 
[No.  6601]  1,  Sumichrast  Coll.) ;  Jalapa  (spelled  Xalapa  on  recent  Mexican 
maps)   (Brit.  M.  1.  yg.,  Hoege  Coll.). 


186 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Chiapas:     Mineral   de   Santa   Fe    (type   locality   E.  rovirosae,   Alfredo  Duges 

Mus.  1,  Rovirosa  Coll.). 
Honduras:    Tela  (Field  Mus.  1,  paratype  schmidti;  Rehn  Coll.);  Lancetilla 

(type  locality  schmidti,  A.N. .S. P.  [No.  19877]  1.  Rehn  Coll.). 


Fig.  23.    Distribution  of  Eumeces  sumichrasti  (Cope),  in  Mexico 

and  Central  America. 


FASCIATUS  GROUP 

This  group  occupies  the  territory  in  the  United  States  and  south- 
ern Canada  east  of  the  98th  meridian  and  in  Asia  in  North  and 
Central  China  reaching  near  Tibet  in  the  west  and  southern  Siberia 
in  the  north.  They  are  present  in  the  line  of  islands  of  the  eastern 
coast  of  Asia  as  far  as  Formosa  and  the  Pescadores. 

The  similarities  between  the  Asiatic  and  American  species  are  of 
such  a  nature  that  it  seems  beyond  peradventure  that  they  are 
closely  related  and  bespeak  a  direct  land  connection  between  their 
present  area  of  distribution  to  the  exclusion  of  the  territory  to  the 
west  of  the  98th  meridian. 

The  striking  thing  regarding  the  two  groups  is  the  small  extent 
of  modification  that  obtains  between  certain  Asiatic  and  eastern 
American  forms,  in  some  cases  so  small  that  they  were  originally 
placed  in  the  same  species.* 

Twelve  species,  three  American  and  nine  Oriental,  are  included. 

*  This  same  close  relationship  is  likewise  apparent  in  Lciolopisma  of  this  same  lizard 
family  (Scineidae). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Exjmeces  187 

Key  to  the  Species  of  the  Fasciatus  Group 

PAGE 

A  Subcaudals  very  narrow  (unless  tail  reproduced);  young  usually  with  a  sublateral  line; 
the  bifurcating  lines  on  head  do  not  or  rarely  join  to  the  median  line  on  Quchals;  seven 
or  eight  labials;  scales  28  30  rows.     [Southeast  1     -  Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor,  224 

\  \      Subcaudals  strongly  widened. 

B.    Xo  strongly  keeled  lateral  postanal  scale. 

('.  A  well-developed  patch  of  enlarged  scales  on  posterior  border  of  femur; 
upper  secondary  temporal  more  or  less  triangular,  emarginate  behind, 
notched  below;  lower,  nearly  parallel-sided;  two  postmen tals;  one  postnasal. 

(China) Eumects  tunganus  Stejneger,  234 

(  <  '.    Xo  patch  of  enlarged  scales  on  posterior  side  of  fen. oral  region. 

I).  Large  species  (120  mm.);  scale  rows  usually  30-32;  upper  secondary 
temporal  not  triangular,  not  emarginate;  lower  secondary  not  parallel- 
sided,  but  usually  more  or  less  fan-shaped;  intercalated  scales  between 
upper  and  lower  lamellae  of  fourth  toe  extend  to  near  the  distal  pha- 
lanx; a  sublateral  line  in  eastern  forms,  none  in  western;  head  red  in 
old  males;  usually  only  one  postlabial,  or  two  very  small  ones.  (South- 
east U.  S.) Eumects  laticeps  (Schneider),   212 

DD.  Smaller,  max.  size  80  mm.;  scale  rows  28-30;  head  not  red  in  old 
males;  intercalated  scales  on  fourth  toe  extend  but  little  beyond  basal 
phalanx;  two,  rather  large,  postlabials.     (Eastern  XJ.  S.) 

Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus),   188 
BB.    A  strongly  keeled  lateral  postanal  scale. 

C.    A  postnasal  normally  present;  one  or  two  postmentals. 

D.  Two  postmentals;  a  well-defined  patch  of  irregular  enlarged  scales  on 
posterior  side  of  femur;  upper  secondary  temporal  with  sides  anteriorly 
more  or  less  parallel,  rounded  posteriorly;  lower  secondary  more  or 
less  fan-shaped;  76  mm.  length;  22-24  scale  rows;  usually  2  nuchals. 
(China) Eumeces  xanthi  Gunther,  239 

DD.    One   postmental;    upper   secondary   temporal   triangular,    emarginate 
posteriorly:  lower  secondary  with  sides  more  or  less  parallel. 
E.    Scale  rows  22;  five-lined  species,  the  median  bifurcating  on  nu- 
chal; frontonasals  forming  suture  or  not;  seven  labials;  two  pairs 
of  nuchals;  max.  size  66  mm.     (Amamioshima.) 

Eumeces  barbouri  Van  Denburgh,   265 

EE.    Scale  rows  more  than  24. 

F.  Scale  rows  28-30,  usually  28;  loreal  variable,  sometimes  di- 
vided transversely,  often  separated  from  the  labials;  no 
evidence  of  scale  patch  on  femur;  median  line  not  bifurcat- 
ing on  head;  prefrontals  always  separated.    (Idzu   Islands.) 

Eumeces  okadae  (Stejneger),  272 

FF.  Scale  rows  24-26,  usually  26;  no  trace  of  a  patch  of  en- 
larged scales  on  femur;  prefrontals  forming  suture  or  not; 
posttemporal  scales  not  strongly  differentiated;  usually  one 
pair  nuchals;  max.  size  80  mm.     (Larger  Japanese  Islands.) 

Eumeces  latiscutatus  (Hallowell),  276 
CC.    Xo  postnasal;  one  postmental. 

D.  Seven-lined;  a  sublateral  line;  lateral  passing  above  ear;  24—26  scale 
rows;  posttemporals  modified;  median  line  bifurcating  on  head;  nu- 
chals, one  pair;  upper  labials,  seven;  63  mm.  max.  size.     (Ishigakijima.) 

Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson,   260 

DD.    Five-lined;  no  sublateral  line,  the  lateral  passing  through  ear. 

E.    The  patch  of  scales  on  posterior  part  of  femur  strongly  defined; 

three  scales  following  upper  temporal,   well  differentiated;  scale 

rows  26-28;  frontonasals  usually  separated;  seven  or  frequently 

six  upper  labials;  very  frequently  only  two  supraoculars  touch 

frontal;  93  mm.  max.  size.     (China) 

Eumeces  elegans  Boulenger,  245 


188  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Key  to  the  Species  of  the  Fasciatus  Group — Concluded 

PAGE 

EE.    Patch  of  irregular  scales  on  posterior  side  of  femur  not  or  but 
scarcely  defined;  seven  upper  labials;  three  supraoculars  in  con- 
tact with  frontal;  usually  26  scale  rows. 
F.    Median   series   of   scales   usually   distinctly   widened;    the 
white  lines  extend  on  tail  one  half  to  three  fourths  length; 
the  dorsolateral  line  follows  middle  of  the  third  scale  row. 

(Riu  Kiu  Is.) Eumeces  marginatus  (Hallowell),  267 

FF.  Median  series  of  scales  less  widened;  light  lines  extend  less 
than  one  third  the  length  of  tail;  dorsolateral  line  passes 
along  back,  along  the  edges  of  the  third  and  fourth  scale 
rows.     (Northern  Riu  Kiu  Is.) 

Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson,  253 

Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus) 

(Plate  13;   Figs.  24,  25,  26,  27) 
SYNONYMY  * 

1758.  Lacerta  fasciata  Linnaeus.  Syst.  Nat.,  Ed.  10,  I,  1758,  p.  209  (type  description  based 
on  Catesby's  drawing  in  Nat.  Hist.  Car.,  vol.  II,  pi.  67;  type  locality,  Carolina);  and 
Ed.  12,  I,  1766,  p.  366;  Dondorff,  Zool.  Beit.,  Ill,  1798,  p.  120,  No.  40;  Shaw,  Gen. 
Zool.,  London,  III,  1802,  p.  241  (noted  as  a  small  species);  Garman,  Bull.  Essex 
Inst,,  XVI,   1884,  p.   14   (under  Eumeces). 

1766.  Lacerta  quinquelineata  Linnaeus.  Syst.  Nat.,  Ed.  12,  I,  1766,  p.  366  (type  descrip- 
tion, based  presumably  on  a  description  made  by  Doctor  Garden  from  specimens  ob- 
served in  Carolina);  Meyer,  Synop.  Rept.,  1795,  p.  29;  Dondorff,  Zool.  Beit.,  1798, 
p.  120,  No.  24;  Shaw,  General  Zoology,  III,  1802,  p.  241;  Green,  Journ.  Acad.  Nat. 
Sci.  Phila.,  IV,  pt.  2,  1818,  p.  284,  pi.  XVI,  fig.  2  (5-lineata  var.). 

1801.  Scincus  quinquelineatus  Schneider.  Hist.  Amph.,  II,  1801,  p.  201  (part.);  Daudin, 
Hist.  Nat.  Rept,,  IV,  1802-'03,  p.  272,  pi.  LV,  fig.  1;  Merrem,  Tent.  Syst.  Amph., 
1821,  p.  72;  Kuhl,  Beitr.  Zool.  Vergl.  Anat,,  Frankfort,  1820,  p.  128;  Harlan,  Journ. 
Acad.  Nat,  Sci.  Phil.,  VI,  1829,  p.  10  (part.);  and  Med.  Phys.  Res.,  1835,  p.  138, 
and  161  (part.);  Holbiook,  N.  Amer.  Herp.,  Ill,  1839,  p.  39  (the  plate  VI  is  a  repro- 
duction of  inexpectatus) ;  Storer,  Boston  Journ.  Nat.  Hist.,  Ill,  1840,  p.  219  (Barre, 
Mass.);    Latreille,  Hist.  Nat.  Rept.,  II,  p.   74,  fig.  p.   64,  No.  3. 

1801.  Scincus  auratus  Schneider.  Hist.  Amph.,  Fasc.  II,  p.  182,  Var.  A.  (part.);  Merrem, 
Tent.  Syst.  Amph.,  1821,  p.   71   (part.). 

1839.    Scincus  lateralis  Saeger.     Silliman's  Journ.,   1839,  pp.   323-324   (Detroit,  Mich.). 

1839.  Plestiodon  quinquelineatum  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V.  1839,  pp.  707-708 
(part.);  DeKay,  Zool.  New  York,  Pt.  Ill,  Reptiles  and  Amph.,  Albany,  1842,  p.  30 
(Pennsylvania  to  Florida);  Linsley,  Amer.  Jour.  Sci.  Arts,  (1),  46,  1843,  p.  41;  Gray, 
Cat.  Spec.  Liz.  Coll.  Brit.  Mus.,  1845,  p.  91  (part.);  Gravenhorst,  N.  Acta.  Ac.  Leop. 
Carol.,  XXIII,  1851,  1,  p.  350,  pi.  XXXV  (part.)  (No.  1  is  same  specimen  as  de- 
scribed by  Schneider  from  the  "Lampeschen  sammlung ;  "  not  type  of  Eumeces  laticeps); 
Jan,  Cenni.  Mus.  Civ.  Milan,  Ind.  Sist.  Rett.  Anf.,  Milan,  1857,  p.  6  (Georgia);  (?) 
Maximilian,  Verz.  Rept.  Reise  Nord.  Amer.  beob.  wurd.,  Dresden,  June,  1865,  pp. 
63-64  (either  fasciatus  or  laticeps)  (between  Natchez  and  Memphis);  Wright  and 
Funkhouser,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  Mar.,  1915,  pp.  134-136  (part.)  (Georgia; 
a  good  account  of  three  species  [fasciatus,  laticeps  and  inexpectatus  considered  as 
one.]);  Schmidt,  Journ.  Elisha  Mitchell  Sci.  Soc,  XXXII,  Apr.,  1916,  No.  1,  p.  36 
(North  Carolina?);  Dunn,  Bull.  Amer.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  37,  1917,  pp.  596,  597,  627 
(North  Carolina)  (part,). 

1842.    Scincus  fasciatus  var.  DeKay.     Zool.  New  York,  Rept.  Amph.,  1842,  pp.  29-30. 

1856.  Plestiodon  vittigerum  Hallowell.  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phil.,  1856,  p.  310  (type  de- 
scription;   type  locality,  Flint,   Mich.     Doctor  Miles  Coll.). 

*  The  correct  placing  of  the  synonymy  of  this  species  is  difficult  owing  to  the  confusion  in 
the  literature  of  three  species,  fasciatus,  laticeps,  and  inexpectatus.  It  is  not  impossible  that 
certain  of  these  refer  only  to  one  or  both  of  the  two  other  species  mentioned. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  189 

1859.  Plestiodon  fasciatus  Baird.  Expl.  Surv.  R.  R.  Route  Pacific  Ocean,  1S">9,  Zool.  Rept., 
Pt.  4  (Fort  Smith,  Aik.);  Allen,  Proc.  Boston  Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  XIII,  1870,  pp.  260- 
263  (New  Bedford.  Mass.);  Allard,  Sci.,  XXX,  1909,  pp.  122-124;  Fowler,  Copeia, 
X...  lit;.  Sept.  20,  1925.  p.  59  (Delaware-),  p.  03  (Maryland),  p.  66  (Virginia); 
Strecker,  Contr.  Baylor.  Uni.  Mus.,  No.  2,  Jan.  15,  1926,  p.  2;  and  idem,  No.  3,  Feb. 
15,  1926.  p.  1:  I.insdale,  Copeia,  No.  164,  1927,  p.  71-  (Kansas);  Stejneger  and  Bar- 
bour, Check  List  No.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  1917,  p.  69;  Bishop,  Copeia,  No.  54,  1918, 
pp.  35-36;  Dunn,  Copeia,  No.  53,  1918,  pp.  16-27  (part.);  ?  Deckert,  Copeia,  No.  54, 
3,  p.  31  (probably  not  fasciatut);  Patch,  Canadian  Field  Nat.,  XXXIII,  1919,  p. 
60  (Canada);  Dunn,  Proc.  Biol.  Soc.  Washington,  XXXIII,  Dec.  30,  1920,  p.  136 
(part.);  Blanehard,  Occ.  Papers  Mus.  Zool.  Uni.  Michigan,  No.  117,  July  6,  1922,  p.  7 
(part.);  Loding,  Geol.  Surv.  Alabama.  Alabama  Mus.  Nat.  Hist..  Mus.  Paper  X".  ">, 
1922,  p.  25  (Alabama:  part.):  Strecker.  Bull.  Xo.  4,  Sei.  Soc.  San  Antonio,  Apr., 
1922,  p.  31  (Texas):  Pratt.  Vert.  Anim.  U.  S.,  1923,  p.  206  (part.):  Strecker,  Baylor 
ITni.  Bull.,  XXVII,  No.  3.  pt.  3,  1924,  pp.  37,  38  (part.)  (habits):  Schmidt,  Copeia, 
No.  132,  p.  68  (South  Carolina):   Force,  Copeia,  Xo.   141,  Apr.  30,  1925,  p.  25  (Okla.). 

1868.    Plistodon  striatus  Abbot.     Geol.  Xew  Jersey,  1S6S,  p.  801. 

1871.  (?)  Plistodou  litieatus  Cope.  2d  and  3d  Ann.  Rep.  Peabody  Acad.  Sci.,  1871,  p.  82 
(lapsus.). 

1875.  Eumeces  fasciatus  Cope.  Bull.  V.  S.  Xat.  Mus.,  I,  1875,  p.  45;  (?)  Coues  and  Yar- 
row, Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phils.,  1878,  pp.  21-28  (Fort  Macon,  N.  C);  Cragin, 
Kan.  Acad.  Sci.,  VII,  1879-80,  (1880),  p.  115  (Kansas);  Cope,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus., 
17,  1880,  p.  18  (part.;;  Yarrow,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat  Mus.,  24,  1882,  pp.  41-42  (part.) 
(includes  inexpectatus  and  laticeps.  Numerous  localities) ;  Smith,  Rep.  Geol.  Surv. 
Ohio,  V,  pt.  1,  Zool.,  1882,  pp.  650-651  (part.);  Davis  and  Rice,  Bull.  Chicago  Acad. 
Sci.,  I,  No.  3,  1883,  p.  31  (Illinois);  and  111.  State  Lab.  Nat.  Hist.,  Bull.,  5,  1883, 
p.  47;  Cragin,  Kan.  Acad.  Sci.,  IX,  1883-1884  (1885),  p.  137;  and  Bull.  Washburn 
College  Lab.,  I,  No.  3,  1885  (Mar.  and  Apr.),  p.  102  (Kansas);  Hay,  Ind.  State  Bd. 
Agri.,  Amph.  Rept.,  XXVIII,  1886,  p.  214  (author's  separate,  p.  14);  Jordan,  Manual 
Vert.  Anim.  U.  S.,  1916,  p.  201;  Hay,  Jour.  Cincinnati  Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  X,  Mar.  30, 
1887,  p.  59  (Indiana);  Abbot,  Pop.  Sci.  Mon.,  Dec,  XXXIV,  1886,  pp.  170-171  (text 
fig.;  account  of  habits;  called  "blue-tailed  skink,"  the  scientific  name  not  mentioned); 
Nelson,  Geol.  Survey  New  Jersey,  II,  p.  2,  Zool.,  1890,  p.  642;  Blatchley,  Jour.  Cin- 
cinnati Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  XIV,  1891,  p.  33;  and  Rep.  of  State  Geologist,  1891,  pp. 
548-549;  and  Ann.  Rep.  Ind.  Dept.  Geol.  Nat.  Res.,  1892,  pp.  546-549  (part.); 
Hurter,  Trans.  Acad.  Sci.  St.  Louis,  Dec.  12,  VI,  1893,  p.  259;  ?  Loennberg,  Proc. 
IT.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  XVII,  Nov.  15,  1894,  p.  321  (very  doubtfully  fasciatus)  (Florida); 
Garman,  H.,  Bull.  Essex  Inst.,  XXVI,  1894,  p.  34  (Kentucky);  Rhodes,  Proc.  Acad. 
Xat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1895,  pp.  386-387;  Mearns,  Bull.  Amer.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  X,  1898, 
p.  326;  ?McLain,  Contr.  N.  Amer.  Herp.,  Feb.  1899,  pp.  1-5  (part.);  Smith,  Proc. 
Linnaean  Soc.  New  York,  No.  11,  1899,  p.  18  (p.  9,  author's  separate) ;  Beyer,  Proc. 
Louisiana  Soc.  Nat.,  1897-1899  (1900),  pp.  25-46  (part.);  Atkinson,  Ann.  Carnegie 
Mus.,  Bull.  I,  1901-1902,  p.  154  (Pennsylvania);  Gibbs,  Morris,  Notestein,  Clark, 
7th  Ann.  Rep.  Mich.  Acad.  Sci.,  1905,  p.  110  (Michigan);  Stone,  Amer.  Nat.,  XL, 
No.  471,  Mar.,  1906,  p.  168  (Pennsylvania,  New  Jersey,  Delaware);  Fowler,  Ann.  Rep. 
New  Jersey  State  Mus.,  1906,  pt.  II  pp.  195-196  (text  fig.,  laticeps;  pi.  50,  inexpec- 
tatus, copied  from  Holbrook)  (New  Jersey);  Surface,  Zool.  Bull.  Dept.  Agri.  (Penn.),  V, 
Xo.  8,  1908,  pp.  249-251,  pi.  31  (also  p.  248,  and  fig.  26);  Brimley,  Proc.  Biol.  Soc. 
Washington,  XXII,  June  25,  1909,  p.  133  (Craven  Co.,  North  Carolina) ;  idem.,  Mar. 
23,  1910,  p.  12  (Mississippi,  Georgia,  Florida  [part.]);  Somes,  Proc.  Iowa  Acad. 
Sci.,  18,  1911,  p.  150  (Iowa);  Dunn,  Copeia,  No.  18,  May  15,  1915,  p.  6  (Virginia); 
Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List  No.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  2d  Ed.,  1923,  p.  75 
(part.);  (?)  Meyers,  Copeia,  No.  131,  June  30,  1924,  p.  61  (North  Carolina);  Blaneh- 
ard, Papers  Mich.  Acad.  Sci.  Arts  Letters,  IV,  1924,  pp.  535-536  (Missouri  and  Illi- 
nois) (part.);  idem,  V,  1925,  pp.  367-388  (Kentucky  and  Indiana);  Strecker,  Contr. 
Baylor  Mus.,  No.  5,  May  15,  1926,  p.  6  (part.)  (Texas);  idem.,  No.  7,  July  15, 
1926,  p.  7  (Texas);  Bishop,  Copeia,  No.  152,  Mar.  25,  1926,  p.  118  (Kentucky); 
Ortenburger,  Copeia,  No.  155,  June  24,  1926,  p.  138  (Okla.);  Netting,  The  Pitts- 
burg Naturalist,  I,  Xo.  I,  Jan.,  1926,  p.  7  (Pennsylvania);  Ortenburger,  Uni.  Okla. 
Bull.,  Proc.  Okla.  Acad.  Sci.,  pt.  1,  VI,  1926,  p.  95  (Oklahoma);  Brimley,  Jour. 
Elisha  Mitchell  Sci.  Soc,  XLII,  1926,  p.  83  (part.);  (?)  Pickens,  Copeia,  No.  165, 
Dec,    1927,    p.    Ill    (part.);    Strecker,    Contr.    Baylor    Uni.    Mus.,    No.    10,    Mar.    15, 


190  The  University  Science  Bulleti 


N 


1927,  p.  14  (Enemies);  idem.,  No.  16,  pp.  1-21  (part.);  Strecker  and  Williams, 
Contr.  Baylor  U.  Mus.,  No.  17,  Oct.  20,  1928,  p.  15;  Burt,  Trans.  Acad.  Sci.  St. 
Louis,  XXVI,  No.  1,  Aug.,  1928,  pp.  51-56  (Map  of  distribution,  fig.  11.)  (Kansas); 
Blanchard,  Copeia,  No.  167,  1928,  p.  47;  Ruthven,  Thompson,  Gaige,  Michigan 
Hand  Book  Series,  Herp.  Mich.,  1928,  pp.  66-70,  pi.  13,  fig.  3  and  map;  Roddy, 
Rept.  Lancaster  County  and  State  of  Penn.,  1928,  pp.  48-50  (Pennsylvania) ;  Pope 
mid  Dickinson,  Bull.  Pub.  Mus.  City  Milwaukee,  VIII,  No.  1,  1928,  p.  46,  pi.  10, 
fig.  2  (Wisconsin);  Gloyd,  Trans.  Kan.  Acad.  Sci.,  XXXI,  1928,  p.  120  (Kansas); 
Burt,  Jour.  Kan.  Ent.  Soc,  I,  No.  3,  1928,  pp.  50-68;  Ortenburger,  Copeia,  No. 
170,  1929,  pp.  11,  27  (Oklahoma);  Strecker,  Contr.  Baylor  Uni.  Mus.,  No.  19,  Sept. 
1,  1929,  p.  13  (Texas);  Cahn,  Copeia,  No.  170,  Apr.  30,  1929,  p.  6  (Wisconsin); 
Corrington,  Copeia,  No.  172,  Nov.  15,  1929,  pp.  68-69  (South  Carolina);  (?)  Burt  and 
Burt,  Amer.  Mus.  Nov.,  No.  381,  Nov.  2,  1929,  p.  9;  Klotts,  Copeia,  No.  173,  Jan. 
16,  1930,  pp.  107-108  (New  Jersey);  Ortenburger,  Copeia,  No.  173,  Jan.  16,  1930, 
pp.  94-95  (Oklahoma);  Babcock,  Boston  Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  No.  57,  Oct.,  1930,  pp. 
11-12  (and  fig.,  p.  10);  Netting,  Ann.  Carneg'e  Mus.,  XIX,  No.  3,  Jan.  21,  1930, 
pp.  171,  172  (Pennsyhania)  ;  (?)  Weller,  Proc.  Junior  Soc.  Nat.  Sci.,  I,  1930,  pp.  9-11; 
Meyers,  Copeia,  No.  173,  Jan.  16,  1930,  p.  101  (N,w  Jersey);  Noble  and  Teal, 
Copeia,  No.  2,  1930,  June  30,  pp.  54-56  (breeding  habits);  (?)  Harper,  Copeia,  No. 
4,  1930,  p.  154  (Georgia);  Conant,  Bull.  Antiv.  Inst.  Amer.,  IV,  No.  3,  1930,  p.  63 
(part.);  Force,  Copeia,  No.  2,  1930,  p.  29  (Oklahoma);  Bond,  Copeia,  No.  2,  1930, 
p.  54  (West  Va.);  McCoy,  Bull.  Boston  Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  No.  59,  1931,  pp.  25-33 
(Key);  Weller,  Guide  to  Exh.  Amph.  and  Rept.  Cincinnati  Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  1931, 
p.  4;  Haltom,  Alabama  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  Uni.  Alabama  Museum  Paper,  No.  11,  1931, 
p.  118;  Gloyd,  Pap.  Mich.  Acad.  Sci.  Arts  Letter,  XV,  1931,  pp.  393,  401;  Taylor, 
Uni.  Kansas  Sci.  Bull,  XX,  No.  13,  Oct.  1,  1932,  pp.  251-258,  pi.  261  (comparison 
with  inexpectatus) ;  idem,  pp.  263-268  (comparison  with  laticeps);  Kingman,  Kansas 
Sci.  Bull.,  XX,  Oct.  1,  1932,  pp.  273-287,  pi.  XXIV,  fig.  3  (skull  characters);  Burt, 
Copeia,  No.  2,  1932,  p.  104  (eliminated  from  Colorado  list);  Stejneger  and  Barbour, 
Check  List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  1933,  p.  81;  (?)  Burt,  Amer.  Midland  Nat.,  XIV, 
1933,  pp.  170-173  (Missouri);  (?)  Van  Hyning,  Copeia,  No.  1,  Apr.  3,  1933,  p.  5 
(Florida);  Noble  and  Mason,  Amer.  Mus.  Nov.,  No.  619,  May  11,  1933,  pp.  1-19 
(breeding  habits);  (?)  Necker,  Bull.  Chicago  Acad.  Sci.,  V,  No.  1,  Jan.  26,  1934,  p.  2 
(Tennessee);  Dury  and  Williams,  Baker-Hunt  Found.  Mus.  Bull.  1,  Nov.,  1933,  p.  14 
(Kentucky  record). 

1878.  Eumeces  striatals  Cope.     Proc.   Amer.  Philos.  Soc.   1S78,  p.  65   (lapsus). 

1879.  Eumeces  quinquelineatus  Bocourt.  Miss.  Sci.  au  Mexique,  Liv.  6,  1879,  pp.  426-428, 
pi.  XXII  E,  fig.  10-10a,  10b,  10c  (part.)  (fasciatus;  possibly  also  laticeps  and  in- 
expectatus); Hurter,  Cat.  Rept.  Batr.  Coll.  Missouri  (privately  printed),  1883,  pp.  1-8; 
Boulenger,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  269  (part.);  Boettger,  Cat.  Rept. 
Samra.  Mus.  Senckenb.  Nat.  Gesell.,  Teil.  I,  1893,  pp.  110-111  (part.);  Cope,  Ann. 
R  p.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  1898  (1900),  pp.  632-640  (part.);  Strecker,  Trans.  Texas 
Acad.  Sci.,  IV,  pt.  2,  1901  (1902),  p.  3  (Texas);  Paulmier,  in  New  York  State  Mus. 
Bull.,  51,  Apr.,  1902,  p.  390  (New  York);  Brown,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1903, 
p.  558;  Stone,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1903,  pp.  538-542  (Arkansas,  Okla.  and 
Texas)  (part.);  Ditmars,  Ann.  Rep.  N.  Y.  ZSol.  Soc,  VIII,  1903,  p.  160;  Morse, 
Proc.  Ohio  State  Acad.  Sci.,  IV,  pt.  3,  Special  Paper  No.  9,  1904,  p.  125;  Henshaw, 
Occ.  Papers  Boston  Soc.  Nat.  Hist.,  VII,  1904,  p.  6  (Mass.,  Conn.);  Gibbs,  Morris, 
Notestein  and  Clark,  7th  Ann.  Rep.  Mich.  Acad.  Sci.,  1905,  p.  110  (Michigan); 
Bailey,  North  Amer.  Faun.,  25,  1905,  p.  45  (Texas);  Brimley,  Jour.  Elisha  Mitchell 
Sri.  Soc,  No.  4,  Dec,  1907,  pp.  144-160  (Key)  (Carolina);  Strecker,  Proc.  Biol.  Soc. 
Washington,  XXI,  Feb.  29,  1908,  p.  49  (Texas);  ibid.  Mar.  21,  1908,  pp.  73  (Texas) 
and  89  (Hot 'Springs,  Ark.);  ibid,  July  27,  1908,  p.  169  (Texas);  Hurter,  Trans.  Acad. 
Sci.  St.  Louis,  XX,  1911,  pp.  140-142  (part.)  (Missouri);  Ruthven,  Mich.  Geol.  Biol. 
Surv.  Pub.,  10,  1911,  pp.  263-264  (Michigan);  Graenicher,  Bull.  Wis.  Nat.  Hist. 
Soc,  IX,  1912,  pp.  80,  81  (Wisconsin);  Ditmars,  The  Reptile  Book,  1915,  p.  196 
(pl.  LVII;  part.),  (also  part.,  pp.  201-203);  Wright  and  Funkhouser,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat. 
Sci.  Phila.,  Mar.,  1915,  pp.  134-136  (part.)  (Georgia);  Thompson,  Occ.  Papers  Mus. 
Zool.  Uni.  Michigan,  No.  18,  Dec.  15,  1915,  p.  4  (Northern  Peninsula  Mich.);  Ellis, 
19th  Rep.  Michigan  Acad.  Sci.,  1917,  pp.  45,  48,  52,  55  (Michigan);  (Anon.),  Okla. 
Geol.  Surv.,  Circ.  6,  1917,  pp.  34-35;  Over,  South  Dakota  Geol.  Nat.  Hist.  Survey, 
Bull.  121  (Series  XXIII,  No.  10,  Bull.  Uni.  S.  D.),  1923,  p.  20  (South  Dakota); 
Ditmars,  Reptiles  of  the  World,   1928,  pp.   183-185  and  197   (part.). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  191 

History.  Probably  no  group  of  species  has  been  more  confused 
or  misunderstood  than  that  composed  of  Eumeces  jasciatus,  laticeps 
and  inexpert  at  us,  and  perhaps  there  is  no  taxonomic  problem 
more  involved  than  that  which  concerns  associating  the  correct 
name  with  the  various  forms.  That  there  are  three  distinct  and 
well-defined  species  cannot  be  doubted  by  anyone  who  will  take 
time  enough  to  examine  them  in  series. 

Pre-Linnaean  literature  on  the  forms  is  not  extensive,  and  ap- 
parently no  effort  was  made  to  differentiate  the  species.  The 
earliest  records  I  find  are  those  of  Petiver,*  who  figures  a  form 
under  the  name  Lacerta  marinus  minor  caudd  caeruled. 

Petiver's  figures  are  such  that  Holbrook  (1842)  states  concerning 
the  last  (Petiver,  1702):  "which  reference  must  go  for  little  as  no 
one  can  positively  determine  at  this  time  what  animal  Petiver  had 
in  view." 

Harlan  (1835)  gives  the  following  reference,  "S.  (cincus)  Ameri- 
cans Petiver  gaxophylacii  Naturae  et  Artis  1711  tab.  69.  fig  13," 
and  on  this  basis  uses  the  name  Scincus  americanus  for  a  specimen 
eleven  inches  in  length  from  the  southern  states  in  the  collection 
of  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences,  Philadelphia. 

Marc.  Catesby,f  in  his  Natural  History  of  Carolina,  Florida, 
and  the  Bahama  Islands,  London  1751-1754  (2  vols,  in  folio,  pis. 
1-120),  gives  a  figure  of  a  lizard  which  he  called  Lacerta  caudd 
caeruled,  from  Carolina;  a  figure  which  apparently  can  be  dis- 
tinguished as  the  smallest  of  the  three  species  that  occur  in  Carolina. 

Linnaeus,  in  the  10th  edition  of  the  Systema  Naturae  (Vol.  1, 
1758,  p.  209),  based  the  species  Lacerta  fasciata  on  Catesby's 
Lacerta  caudd  caeruled,  and  gives  as  a  second  reference,  Petiver, 
Gaz.  Nat.  et  Artis,  pi.  1,  fig.  1.  Linnaeus'  description  is  very  brief, 
the  descriptive  data  being  taken  from  Catesby's  picture  and  de- 
scription of  the  lizard. 

In  the  12th  edition  of  the  Systema  Naturae,  Linnaeus  (1766) 
lists  two  species  of  lined  skinks  from  Carolina,  Lacerta  quinqueli- 
neatus  appearing  on  page  366,  and  Lacerta  fasciata  on  page  369. 
The  former  was  included  on  the  basis  of  a  description  sent  to 
Linnaeus  (apparently)  by  Doctor  Garden,  of  Charleston.  Here 
again,  the  data  recorded  are  so  general  in  nature  that  no  clue  can  be 
found  to  determine  which  of  the  forms  the  Garden  description  may 

*  Musei  Petiveriani  centuriae,  X,  rariora  continentes,  London,  1695-1705,  Vol.  1,  pi.  l, 
fig.  1;  and  Gazophylacii  naturae  et  artis  decades,  London,  1702.  Folio,  pis.  1-100  (pi  69* 
fig.   13)   (1711,  fide  Harlan,   1835). 

t  Also  issued  in  Nurenburg,  a  Latin  and  German  edition  entitled  "Piscium  et  Serpentum 
imagines  quas  Marcus  Catesby  tradidit."     1750-1777,   2   vols,   in   foliis,  pis.   1-109. 


192 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Fig.  24.  Lacerta  caudd  caerulea.  From  Catesby,  "The  Natural  History 
of  Carolina,  Florida  and  the  Bahama  Islands,"  vol.  II,  pi.  67.  Somewhat 
reduced. 


have  referred  to,  and  the  name  quinquelineatus  apparently  cannot 
be  applied  certainly  to  any  of  the  three  forms  of  blue-tailed  skinks. 

Gmelin,  in  the  13th  edition  of  the  Systema  Naturae,  retains  the 
forms  as  given  in  the  12th  edition. 

Certain  references  to  these  Carolina  skinks  appear  in  works  of 
authors  who  did  not  recognize  or  follow  the  binomial  nomenclature 
of  Linnaeus.  In  Laeepede's  Histoire  Naturelle  des  Quadrupedes 
Ovipares  et  des  Serpens  (1788-1790),  the  name  Lc  Lezard  Strie 
was  used  for  one  form  (vol.  II,  p.  116)  and  Le  Lezard  a  queue 
bleue  (vol.  II,  pp.  79-80)  for  the  other. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  193 

Here  again  one  cannot  certainly  state  which  name  applies  to 
these  species.  Daudin,  in  Latreille,  Histoire  Naturelle  des  Reptiles, 
refers  to  L<  scinqvA  a  cinq  raies. 

Daubenton  (Louis- Jean-Marie)  in  his  work  (Les  Quadruples 
Ovipares  et  les  Serpens  [the  second  volume  of  l'Encyclop.  method 
Diet.  Erpet])  recognizes  two  forms:  he  Lezard  a  queue,  bleue,  and 
Le  Lezard  strie,  based  probably  on  the  works  of  Lacepsde. 

Schneider  (Amphibioriuni  naturalis  et  litterariae,  fasciculus  segun- 
dus)  (1801)  recognizes  the  Linnaean  species  quinquelineatus  under 
his  genus  Scincus.  The  description  of  a  specimen  in  the  collection 
of  the  Museum  in  Gottingen  is  brief,  and  its  identity  is  in  doubt. 
However.  Gravenhorst  redescribes  the  specimen  (Gravenhorst, 
1851.  p.  350.  pi.  XXXV).  He  gives  detailed  measurements,  and 
a  detailed  color  description,  noting  that  certain  color  characters 
described  by  Schneider  were  no  longer  visible.  Gravenhorst  lists 
three  Mexican  specimens  under  the  same  description  (perhaps 
Emmas  lynxi   Wiegmann). 

Schneider,  in  this  same  work  (pp.  188-1901,  describes  as  new  a 
-pecies  of  skink,  Scincus  laticeps,  from  a  specimen  in  the  Gottingen 
Museum.  The  description,  while  brief,  appears  to  agree  with  the 
characters  of  the  form  called  laticeps  in  this  work.  No  type  locality 
is  given.  The  great  widening  of  the  head  back  of  the  eye,  combined 
with  coloration,  seems  to  point  to  this  form  (and  apparently  can 
point  only  to  this  species),  and  has  been  so  construed  by  certain 
-til sequent  authors  who  have  recognized  the  large  skinks  of  the 
southeastern  United  States  as  distinct.  Daudin  (1802-'03)  recog- 
nized it;  Dumeril  and  Bibron  (1839  I  ;  Gray  (1845).  However,  it 
does  not  appear  certain  that  the  type  was  examined  by  any  of  these 
authors.  Holbrook  ( 184*2,  vol.  11.  p.  121)  places  this  form  under 
Plestiodon  erythrocephalus  (Guilliams)  and  states:  "I  cannot  re- 
ceive the  specific  name  "laticeps"  for  this  reptile,  because  I  do  not 
suppose  it  with  them  to  be  identical  with  Scincus  laticeps  of 
Schneider.  His  description  is  too  short  and  vague  to  distinguish  his 
animal  from  those  closely  allied.  And  he  never  saw  but  one  speci- 
men in  the  museum  of  Gottingen  in  which  the  'body  was  a  uniform 
grayish-brown  colour  above,  and  the  tail  had  two  black  spots  near 
the  extremity.'  " 

Regarding  the  color  of  the  animal,  I  translate  Schneider  as  "The 
original  color  of  the  specimen  in  the  museum  of  Gottingen  was  dark 
gray  {'erat  fusco  griseus'),  unspotted  save  that  on  the  end  of  the 
tail  two  blackish  ^pot^  were  present   {'quod  in  extrema  cauda  dua< 

13—1123 


194  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

negricantes  maculae  aderunt')."  He  mentions,  also,  a  picture  sent 
by  Doctor  Tilesius  from  Leipzig,  as  of  a  specimen  belonging  to  the 
species,  but  this  is  obviously  an  error  of  identification,  since  the 
specimen  is  spotted  over  the  body,  and  the  tail  is  annulated  with 
dark.  It  would  appear  that  the  spots  on  the  tail  of  the  type  might 
be  discoloration  due  to  injury  or  fixation,  as  no  known  skink,  so  far 
as  I  am  aware,  is  so  marked. 

Whether  or  not  this  type  specimen  is  extant  has  not  at  this  time 
been  ascertained. 

Shaw,  in  his  General  Zoology  (Vol.  Ill,  1802),  recognizes  Lin- 
naeus' Lacerta  jasciatus  for  the  same  lizard  ("seldom  exceeding 
eight  inches  in  length")  occurring  in  Virginia  and  Carolina;  he  re- 
stricts the  name  Lacerta  quinquelineatus  to  the  form  in  Carolina. 
The  descriptive  material  does  not  differentiate  this  from  the  preced- 
ing form  or  from  laticeps,  a  species  apparently  not  recognized  by 
Shaw.  Daudin,  in  his  Histoire  Naturelle  des  Reptiles,  IV,  p.  272, 
pi.  LV,  fig.  1,  describes  and  figures  a  form  under  the  name  Scincus 
quinquelineatus.  The  particular  species  cannot  be  distinguished  by 
the  figure,  while  the  descriptive  material  makes  certain  that  it  must 
include  laticeps  since  he  mentions  specimens  with  a  length  of  "dix 
pouces  trois  lignes."  Apparently  unaware  that  Linnaeus  had  named 
the  lizard  pictured  by  Catesby  (see  above)  Lacerta  fasciata,  he 
attributes  the  name  fasciata  to  the  later  edition  of  Systema  Naturae 
(Ed.  XIII)  by  Gmelin,  and  states  that  he  regards  this  a  variety  of 
quinquelineatus,  partly  on  the  evidence  furnished  him  by  Bosc,  and 
partly  from  his  own  observations. 

Daudin  also  describes  in  this  work  a  presumed  new  species  under 
the  name  Scincus  tristatus,  using  a  name  applied  to  it  by  Bosc  in 
a  manuscript  ("Description  Manuscrite  Communiquee").  The 
length  given  for  the  type  (9  pouc,  1  lign.)  makes  it  certain  that 
this  can  only  refer  to  laticeps.  The  details  given  in  the  description 
likewise  agree  with  the  characters  of  this  species.  This  is  the  Lizard 
rembruni  of  Daudin  in  Latreille,  Hist.  Nat.  des  Rept.,  Vol.  1,  p.  248, 
fig.  2  (fide  Daudin,  1803).  Should  future  researches  {i.e.,  the 
discovery  of  the  type)  show  the  Schneiderian  name  laticeps  unten- 
able, this  name  is  apparently  the  first  name  certainly  available  for 
the  large  skink.  In  this  work  Daudin  lists  Scincus  laticeps  Sch- 
neider and  quotes  Schneider's  description.  Noting  that  it  appears 
to  be  very  close  to  the  scinque  rembruni  (=  Scincus  tristatus),  he 
suggests  the  possibility  that  this  may  be  a  presumed  African  skink, 
such  as  one  figured  by  Seba  (Thes.  1734-1765,  Vol.  II,  pi.  XII, 
fig- 6). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  195 

The  first  American  author  to  use  a  binomial  for  one  of  the  three 
skinks  was  Jacob  Green  (1818),  who  describes  and  figures  a  species 
under  the  name  Lacerta  <i>nnquelineata  (Jour.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci. 
Phil.,  I),  and  in  the  same  year  and  in  the  same  publication  (pp. 
461-462,  pi.  XVIII,  fig.  2)  Gilliams  (1818)  describes  as  new  a 
form  which  he  calls  Scincus  crythrocephalus.  The  type  locality  is 
Maryland  (James  Keech  coll.).  The  description  makes  it  evident 
that  the  species  is  laticeps  Schneider  (tristatus  Daudin).  The  figure 
is  extremely  poor.  Thus  a  third  name  is  definitely  ascribed  to  the 
large  southern  form  of  five-  or  seven-lined  lizard.  The  type  ap- 
parently is  no  longer  extant. 

Harlan  (Journ.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila,  IV,  1824,  pp.  286-288, 
pi.  2)  describes  as  new  a  species  under  the  name  Scincus  bicolor, 
from  a  specimen  preserved  in  the  ''Philadelphia  Museum. "  The 
size  of  the  specimen  as  well  as  its  characters  make  it  certain  that  it 
is  laticeps  (head  and  body  4  inches).  The  figure  is  very  poor  and 
might  equally  well  represent  any  of  the  three  species  save  for  size. 
In  the  same  paper  Scincus  erythrocephalus  Gilliams  var.  is  listed. 
He  mentions  two  dried  and  faded  specimens  in  the  "Philadelphia 
Museum."  These  are  small  specimens,  and  the  description  is  inde- 
terminate. 

Harlan  (1829)  recognizes  three  species.  These  are  Scincus  quin- 
quelineatus, presumably  including  the  young  of  all  three  species, 
Scincus  erythrocephalus  and  Scincus  bicolor.  He  now  gives  a  lo- 
cality for  the  latter — "Inhabits  southern  states."  Harlan  (1835) 
lists  a  species,  Scincus  americanus,  quoting  as  authority  for  the 
name  "S.  americanus,  Petiver  Gaxophylacii  Naturae  et  Artis  1711 
tab.  69,  fig.  13."  He  also  places  "S.  erythrocephalus  Gilliams"  as 
a  synonym.  Scincus  quinquelineatus  appears,  including  Lacerta 
fasciatus  as  a  synonym.  He  still  retains  his  species  Scincus  bicolor 
with  the  comment,  "according  to  Say  this  is  a  bleached  specimen 
of  Scincus  5-lineata." 

Holbrook  (1838,  vol.  II)  redescribes  and  figures  a  large  specimen 
of  laticeps  as  Scincus  erythrocephalus.  The  specimen  figured  is 
still  extant  in  the  Museum  of  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences  of 
Philadelphia.  The  description  is  an  excellent  one.  The. range  of 
the  species  is  given  as  being  from  latitude  39  degrees  north  to 
Florida  along  the  Atlantic  States.  He  includes  Harlan's  Scincus 
americanus  as  a  synonym,  but  does  not  note  Daudin's  tristatus  as 
a  possible  synonym.  In  Vol.  Ill,  p.  39,  1839,  a  species  Scincus 
quinquelineatus  is  describe!  1  and  figured  by  Holbrook.     It  is  ob- 


196  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

viously  a  composite  group  that  is  considered,  since  he  includes  in 
the  synonymy  Scincus  tristatus  Daudin,  laticeps  Schneider,  and 
Scincus  bicolor  Harlan,  as  well  as  the  Scincus  quinquelineatus  of 
various  authors.  However,  the  specimen  figured  is  the  form  in- 
expectatus,  as  is  evident  by  the  character  of  the  scales  under  the 
tail.  This  character  is  mentioned  in  the  text,  but  he  states  that 
this  is  for  one  third  of  the  length  and  posteriorly  they  are  wide, 
"like  subcaudal  scales  of  the  boa."  The  geographic  distribution 
likewise  shows  that  a  composite  form  is  considered.  This  is  from 
latitude  35  degrees  north  to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico.  He  states  that 
Say  observed  it  on  the  Missouri  river  at  Engineers  Cantonment  and 
that  he  has  received  specimens  from  Louisiana  and  Mississippi. 
Scincus  fasciatus  is  described  in  Vol.  Ill,  p.  45.  and  figured  on  plate 
7.  The  specimen  figured  is  a  young  seven-lined  laticeps.  In  the 
second  edition  of  his  work,  issued  in  1842,  Holbrook  again  treats  of 
the  three  forms.  Scincus  fasciatus  is  a  composite  including  speci- 
mens from  Pennsylvania  south.  The  figure  is  of  a  young  specimen 
of  laticeps.  Scincus  quinquelineatus  is  apparently  still  a  composite, 
the  figure,  however,  being  inexpectatus ;  and  Plestiodon  erythroce- 
phalus  is  an  adult  male  laticeps. 

In  a  later  paragraph  he  states:  "The  geographic  distribution  of 
animals  would,  if  it  were  properly  known,  go  far  in  determining 
the  identity  of  the  species;  thus  the  Scincus  quinquelineatus  is  a 
southern  animal  and  has  never  yet  been  found,  as  far  as  I  know, 
north  of  Virginia,  though  abundant  in  the  Carolinas,  Georgia  and 
the  more  southern  and  western  states  ascending  high  up  in  the 
Valley  of  the  Mississippi  [Ohio  and  Missouri]  ;  while  the  Scincus 
fasciatus  inhabits  the  Atlantic  states  from  New  York  to  Florida, 
but  has  not  been  found  west  of  the  Allegheny  Mountains." 

Authors  subsequent  to  Holbrook  apparently  did  very  little  critical 
work  on  these  forms. 

Hallowell  (1856)  describes  as  new  a  skink  from  Michigan  as 
Plestiodon  vittigerum,  a  name  that  certainly  applies  to  the  small, 
widespread  Eumeces  fasciatus.     The  type  locality  is  Flint,  Mich. 

Saeger  (1839)  had  already  described  a  form  from  Detroit,  Mich., 
as  Scincus  lateralis  Say  rar.  If  one  were  to  refuse  to  accept 
Catesby's  figure  as  belonging  to  this  form,  Hallowell's  name  is  the 
first  name  that  unquestionably  can  be  applied  to  this  small,  widely 
distributed  species  of  the  five-lined  skinks. 

In  Cope's  great  work  on  American  herpetology  (19001  the  three 
species  are  united  under  the  name  Eumeces  quinquelineatus.    Cope 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  197 

states:  "Professor  Baird*  lias  shown  that  Scincus  erythrocephalus 
quinquelineatus  and  fasciatus  are  forms  of  the  same  species,  the 
first  name  having  been  given  to  old  males.  .  .  I  have  adopted 
his  opinion.  .  ."  (/ope  apparently  overlooked  the  fact  that 
fasciatus  is  the  oldest  name. 

However,  Cope  names  a  seven-lined  form,  polygrammus,  as  a  va- 
riety of  Eumeces  quinquelineatus  from  Colonels  Island  off  the  coast 
of  Georgia.  Unfortunately-,  this  specimen  (No.  4156  U.S.N.M.)  is 
no  longer  extant,  and  since  both  laticeps  and  inexpectatus  may  have 
seven  lines,  this  name  is  indeterminate  (note  comments  under  inex- 
pectatus).  Two  other  names  have  been  applied,  but  these  appear 
to  be  due  to  error  (Abbot  (1868),  Plistodon  striatus  and  Cope 
(1871)  Plistodon  lineatus) . 

From  the  foregoing  account  the  difficulties  of  definitely  ascertain- 
ing the  proper  name  for  the  three  American  skinks  of  this  group 
must  seem  obvious. 

My  opinion  is  that  Catesby's  figure  and  description,  on  which 
fasciatus  is  primarily  based,  is  an  attempt  to  portray  the  young 
of  the  small  five-lined  form,  here  called  fasciatus,  a  species  which 
occurs  from  Florida  to  Canada,  and  west  to  Texas,  Oklahoma,  Kan- 
sas, Nebraska  and  Dakota.  This  because  of  the  description  given 
by  Catesby,  as  follows:  "This  Lizard  is  usually  small,  seldom  ex- 
ceeding six  inches  in  length,  the  head  short,  the  tail  is  blue,  the 
rest  of  the  body  brown;  except  that  from  the  nose  runs  five  yellow 
lines  at  equal  distances,  along  the  back  to  the  tail.  They  are  seen 
often  on  the  ground,  and  frequent  hollow  trees.  Some  people  sus- 
pect them  to  be  venomous,  tho'  I  never  heard  of  an  instance  to 
confirm  it.  They  are  found  in  Virginia  and  Carolina."  Should  one 
tail  to  accept  this,  the  name  next  in  order  for  this  form  that  can  be 
applied  with  certainty  is  HallowelPs  E.  vittigerum. 

I  believe  the  name  laticeps,  proposed  by  Schneider,  was  based  on 
an  adult  of  the  large  skink  of  the  southern  states,  since  among 
known  species  there  are  none  that  the  description  fits  more  closely 
than  this  species.  There  is  great  likelihood  that  the  type  is  the 
large  species  from  the  southern  part  of  the  United  States,  since  in 
the  same  work  he  describes  other  specimens  from  this  region  and  in 
the  same  museum.  However,  should  the  type  be  discovered,  and 
the  contrary  proved,  the  next  name  in  order  is  Daudin's  Eumeces 
tristatus  (that  of  Gilliams,  Emmas  erythrocephalus,  chosen  by 
Holbrook,  being  much  later). 

*  If  Baird's  opinion  has  been  published,   the  reference  has  escaped  me. 


198  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

For  the  third  species  I  do  not  believe  that  any  of  the  earlier 
names  can  be  applied.  Whether  quinquelineatus  was  based  on  this 
form  or  one  of  the  other  two  cannot  be  ascertained,  since  it  was 
based  on  a  brief  account  (whether  or  not  accompanied  by  a  speci- 
men, as  Holbrook  [1842]  states,  cannot  at  this  time  be  determined) 
written  by  D.  D.  Garden,  of  Charleston,  Carolina.  The  descrip- 
tion will  fit  any  one  of  the  three  forms  at  certain  stages,  since  the 
sublateral  lines  are  the  first  lost  and  all  may  become  five-lined 
lizards  and  the  color  of  the  lines  vary  from  light  blue,  white,  yel- 
low to  brown.  Holbrook  attempted  to  fix  this  name  for  a  five- 
lined  form,  but  without  any  more  positive  information  as  to  the 
type  than  has  been  given  here.  Moreover,  there  is  evidence  that 
his  quinquelineatus  is  a  composite  form.  Whether  the  name  poly- 
grammus*  proposed  by  Cope  for  a  seven-lined  form  refers  to  this 
form  or  a  young  laticeps  cannot  be  ascertained,  since  it  appears  that 
the  type  was  lost  while  the  collection  of  the  U.S.N.M.  was  in  Cope's 
hands  at  Philadelphia  or  subsequently,  since  it  apparently  never 
reached  the  U.  S.  National  Museum  after  the  time  it  was  loaned. 
Unless  this  type  specimen  can  be  found  and  proved  to  be  of  the 
form  with  small  scutes  under  the  tail,  I  believe  the  name  Eumeces 
inexpectatus ,  which  I  proposed  in  1932  for  this  form,  should  stand. 

Diagnosis.  A  member  of  the  Fasciatus  group,  with  the  median 
light  line  bifurcating  on  the  nuchal,  the  branches  reuniting  on  the 
tip  of  the  snout;  a  dorsolateral  light  line,  and  a  lateral  line,  reach- 
ing the  tail,  the  lateral  passing  through  the  ear;  tail  blue  in  young. 
Males  lose  the  lined  markings  and  become  uniformly  colored  above, 
the  lateral  brown  stripe  remaining  more  or  less  evident  throughout 
life.  Seven  (more  rarely  eight)  upper  labials,  the  last  largest, 
separated  from  the  auricular  opening  by  a  pair  of  subequal  superim- 
posed postlabial  scales;  the  lower  secondary  temporal  usually  more 
or  less  fan-shaped;  scales  about  body  normally  28  or  30  (very 
rarely  26);  postmental  divided;  a  single  postnasal.  Maximum 
size,  80  mm.;  prefrontals  in  contact  or  not;  nuchals  usually  one  or 
two  pairs;  lamellae  under  fourth  toe  usually  16  or  17;  intercalated 
scales  on  outer  side  of  fourth  toe  extending  no  farther  than  basal 
phalanx  (rarely  part  way  on  the  adjoining  phalanx).  Subcaudals 
very  distinctly  widened. 


*  Cope  (1900,  p.  637)  states:  "The  Plestiodon  vittiyerum  of  Hallowell  from  Michigan 
belongs  to  the  middle  stage  of  this  species,  var.  polygmmmus.  In  a  large  number  of  small 
skinks,  etc.,  etc' 

The  context  seems  to  show  that  this  statement  is  in  error.  I  believe  it  should  read: 
"The  Plestiodon  vittigerum  of  Hallowell  from  Michigan  belongs  to  the  middle  stage  of  this 
species." 

"Var.  polygmmmus:    In  a  large  number  of  small  skinks,"  etc.,  etc. 

Note   further  comments   on   polygmmmus   under  Eumeces  inexpectatus. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  199 

Description  of  the  species.  A  medium-sized  species.  The  rostral 
high,  the  part  visible  above  usually  less  than  half  the  size  of  the 
frontonasal;  supranasals  forming  a  median  suture  or  not,  distinctly 
smaller  than  the  prefrontals;  frontonasal  usually  broader  than  long, 
in  contact  laterally  with  the  anterior  loreal,  and  in  contact  or  not 
with  the  frontal;  prefrontals  variable  in  size,  if  large,  forming  a 
median  suture,  when  small,  widely  separated,  occasionally  fused 
with  the  frontonasal;  frontal  much  broader  anteriorly  than  poste- 
riorly, the  anterior  tip  angular  or  truncate  depending  upon  the 
relation  of  the  prefrontals;  frontoparietals  forming  a  median  suture 
invariably;  interparietal  usually  elongate,  never  enclosed  by  the 
large  parietals;  usually  two  pairs  of  nuchals,  the  anterior  pair 
usually  larger  (but  shorter  transversely)  than  the  second  pair; 
nasal  relatively  large,  sometimes  approaching  the  size  of  the  in- 
ternasals,  the  scale  divided  by  a  suture,  the  anterior  portion  largest, 
usually  subtriangular;  a  postnasal  almost  invariably  present;  ante- 
rior loreal  relatively  large,  distinctly  higher  than  wide,  reaching 
much  higher  than  the  posterior  loreal ;  latter  longer  than  high,  much 
higher  anteriorly  than  posteriorly;  two  presuboculars  (very  rarely 
three,  in  which  case  the  posterior  loreal  is  shortened)  ;  there  are 
from  seven  to  nine  superciliaries  usually,  eight  being  the  most  fre- 
quent number,  the  anterior  one  usually  larger  than  the  posterior  of 
the  series;  four  supraoculars,  three  in  contact  with  the  frontal. 

Primary  temporal  large,  subrectangular,  invariably  in  contact 
with  the  lower  secondary;  latter  different  in  shape,  but  not  especially 
smaller  than  the  upper  secondary,  which  is  relatively  short  and 
widened  posteriorly;  tertiary  temporal  well-defined,  separated  from 
the  ear  by  an  elongate  scale;  four  postsuboculars  (rarely  five),  a 
small  preocular,  and  two  small  postoculars;  upper  medial  palpebral 
scales  in  contact  with  the  superciliaries;  lower  eyelid  with  elongate 
scales  separated  from  the  suboculars  by  two  or  three  rows  of  granu- 
lar scales.  Upper  labials  normally  seven,  four  preceding  the  sub- 
ocular  (more  rarely  eight,  with  five  preceding  the  subocular) ;  the 
first  labial  a  little  higher  but  not  larger  than  the  three  succeeding; 
subocular  much  longer  than  high;  seventh  labial  much  larger  than 
the  sixth,  the  last  labial,  whether  seventh  or  eighth,  always  largest; 
two  more  or  less  regularly  shaped  superimposed  postlabials,  which 
enter  the  ear  or  are  narrowly  separated  from  it  by  one  or  two  very 
small  granular  scales.  Mental  very  large,  the  labial  border  greatly 
exceeding  that  of  the  rostral;  two  postmentals  (very  rarely  except 
in  Oklahoma   specimens,  where   it  occurs   frequently,  there   is   a 


200 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


fusion  of  the  two  to  form  a  single  postmental)  ;  three  pairs  of  large 
chinshields,  the  anterior  pair  in  contact,  each  posterior  chinshield 
followed  by  a  large  postgenial  which  is  bordered  along  its  ante- 
rior, internal  border  by  a  relatively  large  scale  longer  than  wide; 
usually  six  lower  labials  including  the  last,  which  is  the  largest;  ear 
usually  surrounded  by  18  to  20  scales;  three  or  two  small  lobules 
on  the  anterior  border. 

Scales  on  the  sides  of  body  parallel,  save  behind  arm  insertion; 
the  median  dorsal  scales  not  or  but  slightly  larger  than  adjoining 
rows;  lateral  scales  as  large  as  or  sometimes  a  little  larger  than 


Fig.  25.  Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus).  K.U.  No.  8332,  Lawrence  Co.. 
Arkansas.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head 
length,  11.5  mm.;  width,  11.5  mm. 


dorsals.  Scale  rows  around  head  behind  ear,  33  to  36;  about  con- 
stricted portion  of  neck,  29  to  33;  about  axillary  region,  34  to  38; 
about  middle  of  body,  usually  28  or  30  (in  Kansas  specimens  the 
number  26  occurs  in  several  specimens).  Six  preanal  scales,  the 
median  pair  much  enlarged,  the  outer  scales  overlapping  the  inner; 
the  lateral  postanal  scale  only  slightly  differentiated  in  males. 

About  15  scales  around  insertion  of  arm ;  outer  wrist  tubercle  well 
differentiated;  numerous  enlarged  tubercles  on  the  posterior  half 
of  the  palm;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  5;  9;  11;  11;  8.  Twenty 
scales  about  insertion  of  leg ;  heel  bordered  by  four  enlarged  padlike 
tubercles,  the  median  separated;  only  one  or  two  enlarged  tubercles 
on  the  sole.  Lamellar  formula  for  toes:  6;  9;  13;  17;  10.  Sub- 
caudal  scales  distinctly  widened. 

Color  (in  life).     Young,  black,  with  five  greenish  or  bluish-white 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


201 


lines,  the  median  bifurcating  on  the  nuchal,  the  branches  uniting 
on  the  rostral;  dorsolateral  line  beginning  on  the  first  superciliary, 
passing  back  along  the  side,  following  usually  the  edges  of  the  third 
and  fourth  scale  rows,  although  the  greater  width  is  on  the  fourth 
row;  these,  with  the  median,  continue  about  half  the  length  of  the 
tail;  the  lateral  light  line  begins  on  rostral,  but  is  usually  dim 
anterior  to  the  fourth  labial.  Here  it  widens  and  continues  back  to 
the  middle  of  the  front  edge  of  ear  (in  Arkansas  specimens  it  takes 
a  slightly  diagonal  trend  and  may  reach  nearly  to  the  top  of  the 
cari  ;  it  then  issues  from  the  lower  half  of  ear  behind  and  continues 
to  some  distance  on  the  side  of  the  tail;  a  more  or  less  distinct  light 
line  may  be  evident  on  the  posthumeral  and  postfemoral  regions, 
the  latter  more  generally  present;  below  the  lateral  line  there  is  a 
-tripe  of  black  whose  lower  edge  merges  into  the  grayish  or  bluish- 
may  of  the  abdomen;  chin,  light  cream,  becoming  grayish  pos- 
teriorly; tail  azure. 

Adult  males  have  the  dorsal  color  olive-brown,  the  light  lines 
gray,  or  light  tan,  usually  indistinctly  bordered  with  darker  color; 
a  well-defined  brown  stripe  between  the  dorsolateral  and  lateral 
lines  which  continues  onto  the  tail;  belly  somewhat  greenish,  the 
head  somewhat  orange  or  reddish,  at  least  during  the  breeding 
season;  bifurcating  lines  on  the  head  dim.  Tail  dark  gray-olive. 
Old  males  lose  practically  all  trace  of  the  light  lines,  becoming 
;  Imost  uniform  olive  or  brown-olive  above;  the  lateral  brown  stripe 
is  retained  and  sometimes  the  lateral  light  line.  The  chin,  throat 
and  breast  cream;  the  abdomen  gray. 

Adult  females  retain  to  a  considerable  degree  the  color  markings 


Measurement 

s  of  E 

umeces  fasdatus  (Linnaeus) 

Museum 

:,  i  r, 

T.Z.S. 

yg. 

2162 

Kl. 
yg- 

7658 
K.U. 

yg. 

732 
K.U. 

cf 

4990 

i     -  \".M. 

9 

767  I 
K.U. 

8769 
K.U. 

9 

S774 
K.U. 

& 

8765 

Number* 

K.U. 

Sex 

cf 

Snout  to  vent 

Snout  to  foreleg 

Axilla  to  groin 

Tail 

25 
11.2 

12 

37 
16 

Is 

43 
16 

21 

73 

10 

8 

13 

l  ; 

54 
21 
25 

56 
20 
29 

60 
24 

32 

Ids 

11 

10.8 
is 

64 
23 

37 
110 
10 . 8 
10 
17 
"3 

70 
26.3 

37 

75 
26 
40 

Length  of  head 

Width  of  head 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

6  5 
5 

8 

•      HI  •> 

s  2 
6 

11 

1 1  :-: 

12 
10 
17 

24 

12 
10 
16 
24   ■"> 

13.8 
13 

19.4 
on 

14.2 
13.1 
19.2 
29 

*Nos.   2102,  732,  7658,  7674,  8769,  8774  and  8765,  Lawrence,  Kansas:    545.  Toledo,  Ohio; 
4990,  Ashville,  South  Carolina. 


202  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

of  the  juveniles  save  that  the  dorsal  ground  color  is  brownish  or 
brownish-black,  the  lateral  dark  stripe  differentiated,  and  the  tail 
loses  all  traces  of  the  blue  color;  the  lines  on  the  head  may  become 
dim  and  the  color  of  the  light  lines  less  intense. 

Variation.  This  species,  occupying  such  a  large  territory,  from 
Canada  to  the  gulf,  westward  to  Dakota  and  Texas,  might  be  ex- 
pected to  exhibit  very  considerable  variation.  The  very  surprising 
fact  is  that  it  exhibits  less  than  most  species  even  when  one  con- 
siders a  species  of  very  limited  distribution. 

There  is  apparently  very  little  difference  in  size;  the  largest 
specimens  from  Michigan  are  three  or  four  millimeters  longer  than 
those  from  any  other  locality,  and  slightly  more  robust. 

Probably  the  nearest  approach  to  subspeciation  was  discerned  in 
certain  Oklahoma  specimens  loaned  by  Dr.  A.  I.  Ortenburger.  In 
this  lot  are  numerous  specimens  in  which  the  postmental  is  un- 
divided, a  character  occurring  very  rarely  elsewhere  in  the  species. 
Thus,  in  a  series  of  thirty  Oklahoma  specimens  from  the  western 
part  of  the  range  of  the  species,  fifteen  have  a  single  postmental. 
A  group  of  fourteen  from  this  lot  is  from  Seminole  county,  and  of 
these  nine  have  a  single  postmental.  Throughout  other  parts  of  the 
range  this  character  occurs  rarely  (about  one  in  a  hundred)  in  the 
several  hundred  specimens  examined.  The  preserved  material  shows 
no  well-defined  color  markings  that  would  distinguish  them  from 
their  brothers,  save  in  a  living  specimen — an  adult  male  (taken  in 
a  tree!) — which  displayed  a  very  unusual  shade  of  color,  the  dorsal 
surface  being  uniform  gray-brown  with  lavender  or  purplish  iri- 
descence. It  appears  that  these  aberrant  specimens  are  on  the 
extreme  western  edge  of  the  territory  occupied  by  the  species,  and 
represent,  no  doubt,  an  incipient  species.  In  from  40  percent  to 
50  percent  of  the  specimens  examined,  an  extra  nuchal  is  present  on 
one  or  both  sides,  occurring  with  about  equal  frequency  in  speci- 
mens throughout  the  greater  part  of  the  range,  but  in  Kansas  speci- 
mens the  percentage  having  two  nuchals  is  from  70  to  80. 

The  usual  number  of  lower  labials  is  seven,  the  last  always  larg- 
est. Eight  upper  labials  (five  preceding  the  subocular)  occur  on 
both  sides  rarely  (approximately  four  in  a  hundred) ,  these  chiefly 
through  the  eastern  and  southern  part  of  the  range.  Specimens 
showing  them  on  one  side  were  of  more  frequent  occurrence. 

The  character  of  the  temporals  and  postlabial  scales  showed  a 
surprising  constancy,  the  two  superimposed  postlabials  being  in- 
variably present. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  203 

The  range  of  scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus  varies  from  53  to 
62.  Counts  available  on  more  than  500  specimens  show  the  preva- 
lence of  these  counts  in  order:  30;  39;  60;  135;  129;  90;  24;  1;  1;  1. 
Thus  thirty  specimens  have  a  count  of  53,  39  of  54,  etc.  There  is 
some  regional  variation.  Kansas  specimens  have  a  much  larger  per- 
centage with  56,  Oklahoma  with  58.  The  range  in  a  single  lot 
from  a  single  locality  (Lawrence,  Kan.)  is  53,  6;  54,  10;  55,  7; 
56.  19;  57,  7. 

The  postnasal  is  absent  in  a  very  few  specimens.  I  have  recorded 
its  absence  in  five  specimens,  two  from  Ohio,  two  from  Louisiana 
and  one  from  Kansas.  Two  other  specimens  have  the  scale  absent 
on  one  side. 

The  lamellae  under  the  fourth  toe  vary  typically  from  15  to  17,  the 
number  16  being  most  frequent,  the  numbers  from  14  to  19  occurring 
the  following  number  of  times  respectively,  in  specimens  counted: 
1.  40,  107,  55,  4,  2. 

Superciliaries  vary  from  six  to  nine:  6,  2  times;  7,  84;  8,  144; 
9,  40. 

The  scale  rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body  vary  from  25  to  32 ; 
25  occurring  once  (Kansas) ;  26,  13  times  (10  Kansas,  three  Ohio) ; 
28,  60  times;  29,  17  times;  30.  49  times  and  31  once  (Indiana),  in 
141  counts. 

Remarks.  The  well-known  habit  of  this  species  in  brooding  its 
eggs  has  been  mentioned  numerous  times  in  the  literature,  the  most 
extensive  account  being  the  recent  work  of  Noble  and  Mason  (1933). 

On  numerous  occasions  I  have  captured  specimens  with  eggs, 
usually  under  some  flat  rock,  or  under  the  bark  of  stumps  or  fallen 
logs.    They  usually  appeared  loath  to  leave  the  clutch. 

Dates  on  which  eggs  were  taken  are  June  25,  1926  (Devall  Bluff, 
Ark.),  two  lots  (9  eggs  in  clutch,  very  slightly  incubated);  July  2, 
1926.  clutch  of  9  eggs,  partly  incubated;  July  13,  1926.  clutch  of  10 
eggs,  the  young  well  formed,  the  color  markings  evident.  Newly 
hatched  young  were  first  found  in  Anderson  county.  Kansas,  on 
July  26.  These  had  apparently  just  emerged  from  eggs,  as  sug- 
gested by  the  condition  of  the  umbilical  region. 

Eggs  taken  in  June  were  from  one  or  two  millimeters  smaller  in 
both  transverse  and  longitudinal  diameter  than  those  taken  in  July. 

On  numerous  occasion-  specimens  have  been  kept  in  a  vivarium 
during  April.  May  and  June,  but  I  have  not  observed  this  form 
breeding. 


204  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Distribution.  This  species  has  a  greater  range  than  any  other 
known  in  the  genus.  Authentic  records  from  South  Dakota,  the 
northern  peninsula  of  Michigan,  and  Ontario,  mark  the  known 
northern  distribution.  Unauthenticated  reports  of  the  presence  of 
a  blue-tailed  lizard  in  Manitoba  have  reached  me,  but  this  must  of 
course  be  verified.  Ccpe  reports  a  specimen  from  eastern  Nova 
Scotia  which  now  appears  to  have  been  lost,  In  the  Atlantic  states 
the  presence  of  this  species  lias  not  been  verified  north  of  Massa- 
chusetts. To  the  south  it  extends  at  least  to  northern  Florida.  Along 
the  Gulf  of  Mexico  the  species  extends  to  Louisiana  and  eastern 
Texas.  Burt  (1929)  believes  that  a  specimen  of  obsolctus  reported 
by  Cope  from  Matamoros  is  probably  fasciatus.  An  examination 
of  this  specimen  shows  it  to  be  unquestionably  Eumeccs  obsoletus. 

The  western  limit  of  distribution  appears  to  be  a  line  approxi- 
mately following  meridian  97  degrees  west.  Certain  records  of  the 
presence  of  this  species  from  more  western  localities  must  be  dis- 
counted. Yarrow  (1882)  reports  three  specimens  and  Cope  (1900) 
three  specimens  of  skinks  from  Gila  River,  Arizona  (both  records 
refer  to  U.S.N.M.  9231)  the  former  as  Eumeccs  fasciatus  and  the 
latter  as  guttulatus.  Burt  (1929),  apparently  unaware  of  Yarrow's 
identification  of  the  specimens,  considers  the  sole  remaining  speci- 
men in  the  U.  S.  National  Museum  bearing  the  number  9231  as  a 
young  specimen  of  fasciatus.  An  examination  of  this  specimen 
proves  it  to  be  Eumeccs  callicephalus  or  a  species  extremely  closely 
allied  to  the  latter. 

Yarrow  (1873)  reports  a  specimen,  U.S.N.M.  No.  9230,  collected 
by  W.  S.  Wood  from  Bridger's  Pass.  Wyo.  Cope  (1900)  reports 
specimens  U.S.N.M.  Nos.  3125  (Lieut.  Bryant  Aug.,  1856)  and  9230 
(W.  S.  Wood,  collector  from  Bridger's  Pass),  of  Eumeccs  quin- 
qm  lira  at  us.  Sp:  cimens  bearing  these  numbers  are  no  longer  present 
in  the  collection.  However,  a  specimen  of  Eumeces  multivirgatus, 
U.S.N.M.  9230,  from  Bridger's  Pass   (?),  Wyo.,  is  present. 

In  the  Li.  S.  National  Museum  are  two  specimens  listed  under  No. 
3122,  as  Eumeces  fasciatus  from  ''Between  Guadelupe  Mts.  and 
Pecos  R.,  Texas."  Cope  lists  this  number  under  Eumeces  quiu- 
quelineatus,  but  for  a  locality,  substitutes  a  (?).  These  specimens 
are  fasciatus,  but  the  locality  is  certainly  incorrect.  Two  other 
specimens  (U.S.N.M.  No.  12193)  bear  the  locality  "Santa  Fe,  N.M.? 
Newberry."'  These  are  typical  fasciatus.  The  locality  is  doubtless 
incorrect. 

In  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History  is  a  specimen  (No. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


L'Of, 


15i»(i )  v  fasciatus,  somewhat  atypical,  which  hears  the  locality 
•"Western  Mexico"  (Frank  Tondant  coll..  1904).  It  would  appear 
that  the  Ideality  is  incorrect,  hut  of  this  there  may  he  some  doubt; 
for  the  present  1  shall  regard  it  as  a  fasciatus  probably  originating 
in  some  locality  in  the  normal  range. 


Fig.  26.    Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus).    A.M.N.H.  No.  1596;  "Western 
Mexico."     A.  lateral  view  cf  head;  B.  dorsal  view  of  head. 


Fi<;.  27.    Distribution  of  Eumeces  fasciatus  (Linnaeus),  in 
Eastern  United  Stat.  s. 


206  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

LOCALITY  RECORDS 

Massachusetts  : 

Worcester  Co.:  Barre  (Storer,  1840). 

Bristol  Co.:   New  Bedford  (Allen,  1870). 
Connecticut:    (Ditmars,  1908). 

Litchfield  Co.:  Salisbury  (Linsley,  1843). 

Fairfield  Co.:  Trumbull  (Linsley,  1843). 

New  Haven  Co.:  New  Haven  (Henshaw,  1904). 
New  York:    (A.M.N.H.  1). 

Rockland  Co.:   Ramapo  (A.M.N.H.  1). 

Orange  Co.:  Sterling  Lake  (A.M.N.H.  1);  Highland  Falls  (Mearns, 
1898) ;  Bearfoot  Mt.,  Greenwood  Lake  (Smith,  1899). 

Unidentified:   Bluffs  of  the  Pallisades  (Smith,  1899). 
Delaware:   Choptank  Mills  (A.N.S.P.  2). 
New  Jersey: 

Passaic  Co.:    Bluffs  of  the  Passaic  at  Patterson  (Smith,  1899);  Green- 
wood Lake  (Myers,  1930). 

Atlantic  Co.:    Two  miles  above  Weymouth   (Cornell  1);   Hammonton 
(A.M.N.H.  1) ;  Mays  Landing  (Stone,  1906). 

Bergen  Co.:    (K.TJ.  1) ;  Pallisades  Park  (Meyers,  1930). 
?Sussex  Co.:  Lake  Hopatcong  (Fowler,  1906). 
Maryland:    (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Prince  Georges  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Charles  Co.:   Marshall  Hall  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Anne  Arundel  Co.:   Annapolis  (A.M.N.H.  2). 
West  Virginia: 

Logan  Co.:    (T.Z.S.  1). 

Grant  Co.:   Near  Dorcas  (Carnegie  1). 

Marion  Co.:   Fairmount  (Cornell  1). 
Pennsylvania: 

Clarion  Co.:    (Surface,  1908). 

Huntington  Co.:  Diamond  Valley  (A.N.S.P.  4). 

Dauphin  Co.:    (Surface,  1908). 

Cumberland  Co.:   Carlisle  (U.S.N.M.  6). 

Center  Co.:  Laurel  Valley  (Carnegie  1);  near  Game  refuge  (Cornell  1). 

Clinton  Co.:   Haneyville  (Carnegie  1). 

Allegheny   Co.:    Clairton    (Carnegie    1);    near   Wilkinsburg    (Atkinson, 
1902). 

Westmoreland  Co.:    ? (Netting,   1930;   embryo  34  mm.  long.     Possibly 
laticeps) . 

York  Co.:  York  Furnace  (Stone,  1906)  (may  be  laticeps). 

Montour  Co.:    (Surface,  1908). 

Philadelphia  Co.:  Fairmount  Park,  Philadelphia  (Stone,  1906). 
Kentucky : 

Wayne  Co.:   Mill  Springs  (M.C.Z.  1)  (Mich.  1)  (B.H.F.M.  1) 
(C.S.N.H.  2). 

Breathitt  Co.:  Quicksand  (Cornell  1) ;  Lost  Creek  (B.H.F.M.  1). 

Harlan  Co.:   Pine  Mountain  (B.H.F.M.  1). 

Carter  Co.:    (C.S.N.H.  1) ;  Cascade  Caves  (C.S.N.H.  1). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Ei  meces  207 

Virginia:    (U.S.N.M.  2) ;  Ferry  Landing  (U.S.N.M.  2). 
Albemarle  Co.:   Crozet  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Halifax  Co.:   Midway  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Fairfax  Co.:   Mt.  Vernon  (M.C.Z.  3)  (U.S.N.M.  12);  The  Dyke 

(U.S.N.M.  2). 
Pittsylvania  Co.:   Danville  (M.C.Z.  2). 
Princess  Anne  Co.:  Lynhaven  (A.M.N.H.  2). 
Norfolk  Co.:   Lake  Drummond,  Dismal  Swamp  (U.S.N.M.  8)  (Mich.  2)  ; 

Jericho  Canal,  Dismal  Swamp  (U.S.N.M.  2). 
Caroline  Co.:   Chilesburg  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Allegheny  Co.:   Clifton  Forge  (U.S.N.M.  2). 

District  of  Columbia:   Washington  (U.S.N.M.  2). 

North  Carolina:    (A.M.N.H.  D. 

Wake  Co.:   Raleigh  (Field  D. 
Guilford  Co.:   Guilford  (Mich.  3). 
Lenoir  Co.:  Kinston  (U.S.N.M.  3). 

Craven  Co.:  Newbern  (U.S.N.M.  1) ;  Neuse  River,  New  Bern  (Mich.  1). 
Cataba  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  2). 
Granville  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  1). 
Vance  Co.:   Kittrell  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Cartaret  Co.:  Beaufort  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Robeson  Co.:  Rowland  (M.C.Z.  2). 

Unidentified  localities:   Port  Hudson  (M.C.Z.  2) ;  Lake  Tahoma 
(M.C.Z.  2). 

South  Carolina: 

Anderson  Co.:   Anderson  (A.N.S.P.  1). 
Abbeville  Co.:   Abbeville  (A.N.S.P.  1). 
Charleston  Co.:   Charleston  (M.C.Z.  1)  (A.N.S.P.  7). 
Dillon  Co.:  Little  Pee  Dee  River  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
York  Co.:   Rock  Hill  (Mich.  1). 

Georgia:    (M.C.Z.  2). 

Heard  Co.:   Houston  (Mich.  3). 

Walker  Co.:   Chickamagua  (Phil.  1). 

Liberty  Co.:  Fulton  (M.C.Z.  2). 

Charlton  Co.:  Thompson's  lodge,  Folkston  (Cornell  7). 

Alabama  : 

Perry  Co.:  Uniontown  (A.N.S.P.  2). 
Calhoun  Co.:  Anniston  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Madison  Co.:  Eutaw  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Florida:    (A.N.S.P.  2). 

Marion  Co.:    (Mich.  3)  (Carnegie  4)  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
IVanderburg  Co.:   Perry  Township  (Mich.  2)  (specimen  so  labeled,  pos- 
sibly Vanderburg  Co.,  Indiana). 

Mississippi:    (U.S.N.M.  3)  (A.M.N.H.  1). 

Perry  Co.:  New  Augusta  (U.  of  Rochester  2). 
Lafayette  Co.:  University  (Mich.  4). 
Harrison  Co.:  Biloxi  (A.M.N.H.  1). 


208  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Louisiana:    (Field  2,  with  eggs). 

Caddo  Co.:    (Parish)  Gayle  (Field  4)  (Baylor  2G). 

West  Carrol  Co.:    (Field  1)  (Mich.  1). 

Orleans  Co.:   New  Orleans  (A.N.S.P.  1)  (U.S.N.M.9). 

Jeff  Davis  Co.:    1  mi.  n.  Fenton  (Mich.  1)  ;  Jennings  (Cornell  2). 

I><  Soto  Co.:   Frierson  (Baylor  21);  near  Mansfields  (Baylor  5). 

St.  Landry  Co.:   Grand  Coteau  (U.S.N.M.  7). 

Plaquemines  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  2);  Belair  (M.C.Z.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Bossier  Co.:  Benton  (Baylor  5). 
Tennessee:    (Mich.  2). 

Dyer  Co.:   Maxey  (U.S.N.M.  2);  Lane  (Mich.  1). 

Franklin  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  7). 

Hamilton  Co.:   Lookout  mountain  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Reah  Co.:   Spring  City  (M.C.Z.  1). 

Shelby  Co.:   Raleigh  (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Roane  Co.:   (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Carroll  Co.:   Huntingdon  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Williamson  Co.:   Franklin  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Obion  Co.:   Reelfoot  Lake  (Mich.  7). 

.Madison  Co.:   Jackson  (Mich.  1). 

Henry  Co.:   Henry  (Mich.  5) ;  near  Como  (Mich.  1). 

Cumberland  Co.:   Devils  Tip  Hollow,  near  Crossville  (Mich.  1). 

White  Co.:   Sparta  near  Bon  Air  (Mich.  1). 

Benton  Co.:  Camden  (Mich.  1). 
Indiana:    (M.C.Z.  5). 

It".  Us  Co.:    (Mich.  1) ;  Bluffton  (Mich.  1). 

Harrison  Co.:   Near  Palmyra  (Mich.  1). 

Monroe  Co.:  5  mi.  east  Bloomington  (Mich.  1). 

Vanderburg  Co.:   Evansville  (Mich.  1). 

Jay  Co.:   Salamonia  (Field  1). 

Pike  Co.:   Stendal  (Field  1). 

Knox  Co.:   Wheatland  (U.S.N.M.  5). 

Posey  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  5). 

Vigo  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  1). 

Marion  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  1). 

Putnam  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  1). 

Crawford  Co.:    (M.C.Z. 2). 

Arkansas  : 

Miller  Co.:    (Baylor  7). 

Lafayette  Co.:    (K.U.  34). 

Laurence  Co.:   Imboden  (K.U.  179)  (Field  2). 

Prairie  Co.:   Duval]  Bluff  (K.  U.  11). 

Washington  Co.:    (K.U.  8). 

Union  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Logan  Co.:    Blue  mountain.  Choctaw  Route  (A.N.S.P.  2);  Magazine  Mt. 

(A.N.S.P.  4). 
Carrol  Co.:   Lake  Lucerne  (Mich.  1). 

Benton  Co.:    2V2  mi.  NE  Sulphur  Springs  (Mich.  6) ;  V-i  mi.  S  Sulphur 
Springs  (Mich.  1). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  209 

Garland  Co.:   Hot  Springs  (Baylor  5). 
Saline  Co.:   (E.H.T.  3). 
Ohio: 

Adams  Co.:  Buena  Vista  (O.S.M.  1). 

Franklin  Co.:   Truro  Twp.  (O.S.M.  1);  Columbus  (O.S.M.  1). 

Athens  Co.:   Athens  (Ohio  U.,  Athens,  Ohio,  1). 

Scioto  Co.:    Brush  Creek  (Toledo  2);  Sunshine  (Toledo  1);  Roosevelt 

Game  preserve  (Toledo  1);  Shawnee  Forest  (O.S.M.  1). 
Paulding  Co.:   Antwerp  (O.S.M.  1)  (Cincinnati  M.N.H.  1). 
Hamilton  Co.:    (O.S.M.  2). 
Hardin  Co.:  3  mi.  east  Mt.  Victory  (Toledo  36) ;  Dudley  Twp. 

(Toledo  3). 
Hocking  Co.:   Good  Hope  Twp.  (Toledo  1)  (O.S.M.  1);  Clear  Creek 

(O.S.M.  2). 
Wood  Co.:  Ross  Twp.  (Toledo  1). 
Butler  Co.:   Huestons  Woods  near  Oxford  (Toledo  1). 
Knox  Co.:   Mt.  Vernon  (Oberlin  College  1). 
Putnam  Co.:    3  mi.  NW  Ottawa  (Toledo  1). 
Lucas  Co.:  Toledo  (Toledo  1) ;  Richfield  Twp.  (Toledo  14) ;  Treadway 

(Toledo  1) ;  Bancroft  and  County  line  Road  (Toledo  6). 
Crawford  Co.:  4  mi.  NW  Sulfur  Springs  (Toledo  1) ;  3  mi.  N  Bucyrus 

(Toledo  1). 
I'nion  Co.:   Washington  Twp.  (Toledo  1). 
Highland  Co.:  Foot  Hill  (Toledo  1). 
Pike  Co.:   Mifflin  Twp.  (Toledo  1). 
Hancock  Co.:   Cass  Twp.  (Toledo  3). 
Ashtabula  Co.:   Pymatuning  Swamp  (Toledo  1). 
Richland  Co.:   Plymouth  Twp.  (Toledo  1). 
Illinois  : 

Alexander  Co.:   Olive  Branch  (Field  14). 

Union  Co.:  Celto  Pass  (Field  6). 

Pulaski  Co.:   Grand  Chain  (Field  1). 

Cook  Co.:   Edgewater  (Field  1);  Shermerville  (Field  1). 

Johnson  Co.:  20  mi.  N.  Metropolis  (Mich.  1). 

Wabash  Co.:   Mount  Carmel  (U.S.N.M.  6). 

Menard  Co.:   Athens  (M.C.Z.  1). 

Jackson  Co.:   Murphysboro  (M.C.Z.  1).    Unidentified:   Aux  Plains,  III. 

(U.S.N.M.  1)  (possibly  not  Illinois). 
Michigan:    (M.C.Z.  1)  (A.X.S.P.  5). 
Lenawee  Co.:    (Mich.  1). 

Huron  Co.:  Sand  Point  (Mich.  16);  Rush  Lake  (Mich.  1). 
St.  Clair  Co.:   China  Twp.  (Mich.  1). 
Oakland  Co.:   Royal  Oak  Twp.  (Mich.  1). 
Monroe  Co.:    (Mich.  7). 
Manistee  Co.:  East  Lake  (Mich.  1). 
Crawford  Co.:    (Mich.  1). 
Ingham  Co.:  East  Lansing  (Mich.  1). 
Berrien  Co.:   Warren  Dunes  (Mich.  2). 
Charlevoix  Co.:    (Ruthven  et  al..  1928). 

14—1123 


210  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Grand  Traverse  Co.:  Traverse  City  (Mich.  2). 
Muskegon  Co.:    (Field  2). 
Marquette  Co.:    (Mich.  1). 
Missaukee  Co.:    (Mich.  1). 
Lake  Co.:    (Mich.  1). 
Kalkaska  Co.:    (Mich.  2). 

Washtenaw   Co.:     Ann    Arbor    (M.C.Z.    1).      (Also    Kalamazoo,    Kent, 
Ottawa,  St.  Joseph,  Van  Buren,  Mont  Calm  and  Barry  counties  listed 
by  Gibbs,  Notestein  and  Clark,  1905.) 
Oklahoma:    ( A.M.N .H.  1). 

Pittsburg  Co.:   South  McAlester  (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Cleveland  Co.:    (O.U.  5). 

Creek  Co.:    Sapulpa  (A.M.X.H.  1). 

Caddo  Co.:    (O.U.  1). 

Rogers  Co.:    (O.U.  1) ;  Claremore  (M.C.Z.  1). 

LeFlore  Co.:    (O.U.  3) ;  Sugarloaf  Mt.  (A.N.S.P.  3) ;  Wistar  (A.N.S.P  1) 

Hughes  Co.:    (O.U.  2). 

Ottawa  Co.:   Wyandotte  (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Seminole  Co.:    (O.U.  14). 

Choctaw  Co.:    (O.U.  1). 

Washington  Co.:    (K.U.  1). 

Sequoyah  Co.:    (O.U.  2). 

Latimer  Co.:    (O.U.  19). 

Adair  Co.:    (O.U.  3). 

McCurtain  Co.:    (O.U. 6);  Broken  Bow  (Field  6). 

Logan  Co.:    (O.U.  5). 

Oklahoma  Co.:    (O.U.  1). 

Tulsa  Co.:    (O.U.  2)  (Mich.  6). 

Okmulgee  Co.:    (O.U.  20)  (K.U  3)  (Mich.  7). 

Payne  Co.:    (O.U.  3). 

Comanche  Co.:    (O.U.  4). 

Atoka  Co.:   Limestone  Gap  (A.N.S.P.  4). 

Kansas: 

Anderson  Co.:    (K.U.  43). 

Franklin  Co.:    (K.U.  5)  (Mich.  17). 

Wilson  Co.:    (K.U.  2). 

Labette  Co.:    (K.U.  7). 

Woodson  Co.:    (Burt,  1928). 

Sumner  Co.:    (K.U.  2). 

Douglas  Co.:    (K.U.  107)  (Field  1)  (Cornell  1). 

Elk  Co.:    (Burt,  1928). 

Cherokee  Co.:    (K.U.  7)  (A.M.N.H.  1). 

Bourbon  Co.:   <Mich.  6). 

Sedgwick  Co.:    (K.U.  1). 

Greenwood  Co.:    (K.U.  2). 

Doniphan  Co.:    (K.U.  4). 

Wyandotte  Co.:    (K.U.  5). 

Montgomery  Co.:   (K.U.  9). 

Allen  Co.:    (K.U.  16). 


Taylor:    The  Geni  -  Ei  meces  211 

I.,  a  i ■-tit  ( '<>.:    (  K.U.  3). 

§   awnt  i   <  'o.:    I  K.U.  1 ). 
Johnson  ( 'o.:    (Carnegie  1). 
Miami  Co.:   (Carnegie  I)  (Mich..". 
Riley  Co.:    (Cragin,  1880). 
Geary  Co.:    (Hun.  1928) 
Atchison  Co.:    (Burt,  1928). 
Jefferson  Co.:    (Burt.  1928). 

Missouri: 

on  Co.:    (K.U.  2)  (Carnegie  1). 
Jackson  Co.:    (K.U.  4). 
Stom   Co.:    (A.M.N.H.  1);  Galena  (A.N.S.P.  1);  Marble  Cave 

\  M.N.H.  2). 
St.  Louis  Co.:  St.  Louis  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Christ;,,,,  Co.:  Chadwick  (A.N.S.P.  1). 
Dunklin  Co.:    (Carnegie  1)  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
Pemiscot  Co.:   10  mi.  SE  Portageville  (Mich.  2) ;  3  mi.  SE  Portageville 

(Mich.  1). 
Carter  Co.:   Big  Spring  Park  (Mich.  7).    Unidentified:   Shepard.  Mo. 

(Mich.  1). 

Tex  as  : 

Henderson  Co.:    New  York  (Baylor  1). 

Harrison  Co.:  Caddo  Lake  (Baylor  1). 

McLi  nnan  ( 'o.:    (K.U.  1) ;  "McGregor  to  Conjelle  line"  (Baylor  1). 

Dallas  Co.:    (K.U.  1)  :  Dallas  (A.N.S.P.  3.  Boll  Coll.) ;  (M.C.Z.  5). 

Gregg  Co.:    (K.U.  1). 

Ellis  Co.:    (K.U.  1). 

Baylor  Co.:   Seymour  (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Matagorda  Co.:   Matagorda  (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Liberty  Co.:   Liberty  (Mich.  2);  Dayton  (Cornell  1);  Cleveland 

Baylor  1). 
Shelby  Co.:   Joaquin  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Tyler  Co.:  Doncette  (Cornell  1). 
Marion  Co.:  Lake  Caddo  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
Bowie  Co.:   Sulphur  River  (Baylor  10). 

Wisconsin  : 

Juneau  Co.:   New  Lisbon  (Field  1). 

Clark  Co.:    (Field  1). 

Walworth  Co.:    (Higley,  1889). 

Milwaukee  Co.:    (Pope-Dickinson,  1928). 

Washington  Co.:    (Pope-Dickinson,  1928). 

Polk  Co.:    (Pope-Dickinson.  1928). 

Portage  Co.:    (Pope-Dickinson,  1928). 

Waukesha  Co.:   Golden  Lake  (Calm,  1929). 
Nebraska:    '.'Fort  Pierre  (Cope,  1900)  (specimen  lost). 
Iowa:    (Seme-.  1911  I. 

Woodbury  Co.:  Sioux  City  (A.N.S.P.  1)  (labeled  Dakota,  possibly  from 
across  the  river) . 
South  Dakota:    Clay  Co.:  4  mi.  easl  of  Vermillion  (Over.  1923). 


212  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

CANADA 
Nova  Scotia:   St.  Catherines  (River?)  (U.S.N.M.  1,  No.  4827). 

Ontario: 

Essex  Co.:  Point  Pelee  (N.M.C.  9) ;  Arner  (N.M.C.  3). 
Peterborough  Co.:   Peterborough  (N.M.C.  2). 
Frontenac  Co.:   Mountain  Grove  (N.M.C.  1). 
Simcoe  Co.:  Go  Home  Bay  (R.  Ontario  M.  1) ;  Honey  Harbor 
R.  Ontario  M.  1). 

Eumeces  laticeps   (Schneider) 

(Plates  14,  15;   Figs.  28,  29,  30) 

Note:  It  has  been  impossible  to  determine  with  certainty  that  the  names 
allocated  here  all  belong  under  this  species.  Moreover,  it  is  quite  as  probable 
that  certain  listed  under  Eumeces  fasciatus  belong  here. 

SYNONYMY 
1801.    Scincus   laticeps    Schneider.      Hist.    Amph.,    II,    1801,    pp.    189-190    (type    description; 

no   type   locality;    type  originally   in   Museum   of   Gottingen,    Germany);    Daudin,   Hist. 

Nat.    Rept.,    IV,    1803,    p.    301    (^description,    after    Schneider);    Merrem,   Tent.    Syst. 

Amph.,  1821,  p.  72. 
1801.    Lacerta  tristata  Latreille.     Hist.  Nat.   Rept.,  I,  p.   248  (not  seen). 
1802-'03.    Scincus  tristatus  Daudin.     Hist.   Nat.   Rept.,  IV,  p.   296   (part.)   (description  based 

partly  on  a  manuscript  description  and  partly  on  specimens  presumably  from  Carolina). 
1803.    Scincus  quinquelineatus  Daudin.     Hist.   Nat.   Rept.,   IV,   1803,  p.  272   (part.);    Harlan, 

Journ.   Acad.    Nat.   Sci.    Phila.,   VI,   pt.    1,    1829,   pp.    10-11    (part.);    and   Med.    Phys. 

Res.,  1835,  pp.  138  and  161  (part.);   Holbrook,  N.  Amer.  Herp.,  Ill,  1839,  pp.  39,  40; 

and  2d  Ed.,  II,   1842,  pp.   121-125. 
1818.    Scincus  erythrocephalus   Gilliams.     Journ.   Acad.   Nat.   Sci.   Phila.,   I,   1818,   p.    461,  pi. 

XVIII  (type  description;    type  locality,  "Southern  States");   Harlan,  Journ.  Acad.  Nat. 

Sci.  Phila.,  VI,  pt.   1,   1829,  p.   11   (southern  states);    and  Phys.   Med.   Res.,   1835,  pp. 

138,  139;    Holbrook,  N.  Amer.  Herp.,  1st  Ed.,  II,  1838,  pp.  101-103,  pi.  XXII  (plate 

drawn   from  A.N.S.P.   No.   9298);    Cuvier,   Reg.   Anim.,   1829,   p.   62;    Griffith,   Cuvier's 

Anim.  King.,  IX,  1831,  p.  157. 
1824.    Scincus    bicolor   Harlan.      Jour.    Acad.    Nat.    Sci.    Phila.,    IV,    pt.    2,    1824,    p.    286,    pi. 

XVIII,   fig.    1    (type  description;    type   locality,    "Southern   States");    and  Journ.    Acad. 

Nat.    Sci.    Phila.,   VI,   pt.    1,    1829,   pp.    11-12,   and    37;    and    Med.    Phys.    Res..    1835, 

p.   139;    Cuvier,   Reg.   Anim.,   2d  Ed.,  II,   1829,  p.   62;    Griffith,   Cuvier's  Anim.   King., 

IX,  1831,  p.   157. 

1830.  Euprepes  tristatus  Wagler.     Syst.   Amph.,  1830,  p.   62. 

1831.  Tiliqua  erythrocephala  Gray.  In  Griffith's  Cuvier's  Anim.  Kingd.,  IX,  Syn.,  1831, 
pp.  69-70;    Mag.  Nat.  Hist.  Jardine,  I,  p.   292. 

1831.  Tiliqua  quinquelineata  Gray.  In  Griffith's  Cuvier's  Anim.  King.,  IX,  Syn.,  1831, 
pp.   r>9,  70  (part.). 

1831.     Tiliqua  bicolor  Gray.     In  Griffith's  Cuvier's  Anim.  King.,  IX,  1831,  p.  70. 

1835.  Scincus  americanus  Harlan.  Med.  Phys.  Res.,  1835,  pp.  138,  139  (name  apparently 
based  on  Petiver's    [Gazoph.  Nat.   et  artis,   1711]    tab.   69,  fig.   13    Tnot  seen]). 

1839.  Plestiodon  laticeps  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  pp.  705-706;  Gray, 
Cat.  Spec.  Liz.  Coll.  Brit.  Mus.,  1845.  pp.  90-91 ;  ?Jan,  Cenni.  Mus.  Civ.  Milan 
Ind.  Sist.  Rett.  Anf.,  Milan,  1857,  p.  6  (Georgia);  Baird,  Expl.  and  Surv.  R.  R.  Route 
Pac.  Ocean,  1859,  pp.  25-27  (specimen  mentioned  now  U.S.N.M.  9239);  ?Theobald, 
Cat.  Rept.  Mus.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  (No.  CXLVI),  Ext.  number  Journ.  Asiat.  Soc. 
Bengal,  1866,  p.   26. 

1839.  Plestiodon  qu.ivquelincatum.  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  pp.  707-709 
(part.);  Wright  and  Funkhouser,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat,  Sci.  Phila.,  1915,  pp.  133-136 
(Okefinokee  Swamp.  [part.]  This  lot  contains  laticeps.  inexpectatus  and  a  form 
having  24  scale  rows.  This  specimen  has  been  beheaded  and  cannot  be  properly 
identified). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  213 

1839.    Scincus  fasciatus  Holbrook.      X.    Amer.    Herp.,   1st  Ed.,   1839,   III,   p.    4.").   pi.    7;    and 

idem,  2d  Ed.,  1842,  II,  pp.   127-129,  pi.   18  (the  figure  is  laticeps). 
1838.     Tiliqua    erythrocephala    Gray.       Cat.     Slend.-Tongued     Saur.,     M:ig.     Nat.     Hist.,     II, 

1838-'39,  p.  292. 
1842.    Plcstiodon  erythrocephalus  Holbrook.     X.  Amer.   Herp.,  2d  Ed.,  1842,  pp.  117-120,  pi. 

XVI;  DeKay,  Zool.  N.  Y.,  Kept,  Amph.,  1842,  p.  30. 
1864.    -Eumeces  laticeps  Peters.      Monatsb.   Konigl.   Akad.   Wiss.    Rerl.,   1864,   p.    49 ;    Bocourt, 

Miss.   Sci.    Mex.,   Liv.   6,   1879,  pi.   XXII,  D,  figs.   6,   6a,   6b;    Taylor,  Univ.   Kan.   Sci. 

Bull.,  XX,  No.  13,  May  15,  1932  (issued  Oct.  1,  1932),  pp.  251-261   (comparison  with 

E.  inexpectatus) ;   ibid,   Xo.   14,  May  15,  1932   (issued  Oct.   1,   1932),  pp.   263-271,  pis. 

XIX   and   XX;    Dury   and    Williams,    Baker-Hunt   Found.    Mus.,    Bull.    I,    Nov.,    1933, 

p.   14   (Kentucky  records). 
1879.    Eumeces  quinquelineatus  Bocourt.     Miss.  Sci.  Mex.,  Liv.  6,  1879,  pp.  426-428  (part.): 

-      th,  Rep.   Geol.  Surv.   Ohio,   V,  pt.   1,   1SS2,   pp.   650,   651    (part.);    Boulenger,   Cat. 

Liz.  Brit,  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  269  (part.);    Rhodes,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1895, 

pp.   386,  387   (part.);    McLain,   Contr.   N.   Amer.   Herp.,   1899,   pp.   1-5   (part.);    Stone, 

Proc.    Acad.    Nat.   Sci.    Phila.,    1903,   p.    538    (part.)    (Spec,    from   Petit   Jean    Mt.   Ark. 

A.N.S.P.    15452);    Stone,   The   Amer.    Nat.,   XL,    Mar.,    1906,    p.    168    (York    Furnace, 

York  Co.,  Pa.);   Strecker,  Proc.  Biol.  Soc.  Wash.,  XXI,  July  27,  1908,  p.  169  (part,); 

Hurter,  Trans.  Acad.  Sci.   St.  Louis,  XX,   1911,  pp.    140-142   (part.)   (Missouri);    Dit- 

mars,  The  Reptile  Book,  1915,  pp.  196,  197   (part.),  and  pp.  201-203  (part.). 
1882.    Eumeces  fasciatus  Yarrow.     Bull.   U.   S.   National   Museum,   No.   24,   1882,  pp.    41,    42 

(part,);    Blatchley,    Rep.    State   Geol.,    1891    (1892),    pp.    548,    549    (part.);    Stejneger 

and   Barbour,   Check   List    X.    Amer.    Amph.   and   Rept.,    2d   Ed.,    1923,   p.    75    (part,); 

Blanchard,    Papers.    Mich.    Acad.    Sci.    Arts    Lett.,    IV,    1924,    pp.    535,    536     (part.) 

(Nos.    58737    and    58738);    Strecker,    Contr.    Baylor   U.    Mus.,    No.    5,    May    15,    1926, 

pp.   5,  6   (part.)   (Louisiana) ;    and  idem,  No.   7,   1926,  p.   7   (part.) ;    Ortenberger,   Uni. 

Okla.   Bull.,   Proc.   Okla.   Acad.    Sci.,   VI,    pt.    1,    1926,   p.    95    (part,);    Brimley,   Journ. 

Elisha   Mitchell   Sci.   Soc,  XLII,   1926,   p.   83    (Key;    part.);    Ortenberger,   Copeia,   No. 

170,    1929,   p.    11    (part.),    and   p.    27    (part,);    Conant,    Bull.    Antiv.    Inst.    Amer.,   IV, 

No.  3,  Dec,  1930,  p.  63  (part.). 
1917.    Plestiodon  fasciatus  Stejneger  and  Barbour.     Check  List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  1917, 

p.  69;   Blanchard,  Occ  Papers  Mus.   Zool.  U.   of  Mich.,  No.   117,  1922,  p.   7   (part.; 

2  specimens  from  Henry,  Tenn.)  ;   Strecker,  Baylor  U.  Bull.,  XXVII,  No.  3,  pt.  3,  1924, 

pp.  37,  38  (part.)  (Arkansas). 

History.  In  a  short  paper  published  in  1932  I  revived  the  name 
Eumeces  laticeps  for  the  large,  lined  skink  occurring  in  the  south- 
eastern part  of  the  United  States,  a  name  first  assigned  by  Schneider 
(1801)  to  a  broad-headed  skink  in  the  Museum  of  Gottingen.  This 
brief  description  points  out  certain  salient  features  of  the  adult 
male,  but  omits  pertinent  details  of  squamation.  It  likewise  men- 
tions the  fact  that  formerly  the  specimen  had  black  spots  near  the 
end  of  the  tail,  a  character  normally  present  in  no  skink  known  to- 
day. One  presumes  that,  if  present,  these  marks  may  have  been 
due  to  injury  or  some  accident  of  preservation  (such  as  a  fungus 
growth  when  a  preserving  fluid  has  become  very  weak).  Unfor- 
tunately the  origin  of  the  specimen  was  either  not  known  or  not  re- 
corded by  Schneider.  The  second  specimen  mentioned  by  Schneider, 
known  to  him  only  by  a  drawing,  is  obviously  not  of  this  species. 
Inquiry  regarding  the  type  has  to  date  met  with  no  reply.  I  re- 
gard it  likely  that  it  is  still  extant. 

Under  Eumeces  fasciatus  I  have  traced  the  history  of  this  form, 
and  believe  it  unnecessary  to  repeat  it  here  (consult  pa.ircs  188-198  i. 


214  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Diagnosis.  A  large  species  of  the  Fasciatus  group,  characterized 
by  the  presence  of  five  or  seven  white  lines  in  the  young,  the  median 
bifurcating  on  the  nuchal,  and  the  brandies  running  forward  to  the 
frontonasal;  tail  blue  in  young;  limbs  long,  overlapping;  prefron- 
tals broadly  in  contact;  one  postnasal;  two  postmentals;  subcaudal 
scales  greatly  widened;  scale  rows  30-32;  usually  eight  supralabials, 
five  preceding  the  subocular,  which  is  relatively  high ;  primary  tem- 
poral relatively  small,  touching  the  lower  secondary,  which  is 
frequently  enclosed  by  the  tertiary  temporal  and  the  last  labial; 
latter  relatively  low  and  much  elongated;  the  intercalated  plates 
on  the  outer  side  of  fourth  toe  extend  to  or  nearly  to  ultimate 
phalanx. 

Description  of  the  species.  Portion  of  rostral  visible  above  often 
approaching  the  size  of  the  frontonasal;  supranasal  moderate,  longer 
than  wide,  forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal  relatively  small, 
almost  invariably  separated  from  the  frontal;  prefrontals  large, 
almost  invariably  in  contact,  much  larger  than  the  frontoparietals; 
frontal  usually  constant  in  shape,  broadly  angular  anteriorly,  pos- 
teriorly the  sides  sloping  gradually,  in  contact  with  three  supraocu- 
lars; frontoparietals  relatively  small,  forming  a  suture  usually  equal 
to  a  half  or  more  of  their  length;  interparietal  relatively  short  and 
wide,  usually  truncate  posteriorly ;  one,  rarely  two,  pairs  of  nuchals, 
not  as  strongly  differentiated  as  and  relatively  smaller  than  in 
most  species. 

Nasal  moderately  large,  divided  by  a  suture,  the  anterior  part 
largest;  a  small  postnasal;  anterior  loreal  higher  than  wide,  higher 
than  posterior;  latter  large,  much  longer  than  high;  two  presub- 
oculars,  the  anterior  usually  much  the  larger;  four  supraoculars; 
superciliaries  eight  to  ten;  five  (or  four)  postsuboculars;  primary 
temporal  subquadrangular,  in  contact  with  the  lower  secondary 
temporal,  which  is  triangular  if  enclosed  by  the  seventh  labial 
and  the  elongate  tertiary,  or  the  lower  part  may  be  elongated 
by  fusion  with  a  scale  segmented  from  the  tertiary  temporal  and 
as  a  result  reaches  the  edge  of  the  ear;  upper  secondary  temporal 
usually  more  than  twice  the  area  of  the  primary,  much  widened 
posteriorly.  Usually  eight  labials  (rarely  seven) ,  five  preceding 
the  subocular,  which  is  as  high  or  higher  than  length  of  its  labial 
edge;  first  labial  a  little  higher  than  but  rarely  as  large  as  the  third 
or  fourth;  eighth  labial  much  elongated  along  labial  border,  sepa- 
rated from  the  ear  by  (normally)  one  small  postlabial,  very  rarely 
by  two  superimposed,  in  which  case  the  upper  is  usually  a  segment 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Evmeces 


215 


of  the  tertiary  temporal;  anterior  ear  lobules  inconspicuous,  usually 
thickened  and  flattened,  lying  close  to  the  surface;  upper  palpebral 
scales,  with  the  exception  of  one  or  two  (or  in  one  case  none), 
separated  by  a  row  of  grannies  from  the  superciliaries ;  lower  lid 
with  four  or  five  enlarged  plates  separated  from  the  subocular  by 
usually  four,  rarely  three  or  five,  rows  of  granules;  mental  moderate, 
with  a  labial  border  much  larger  than  that  of  rostral;  two  post- 
mentals,  the  anterior  small;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  first  only  in 
contact;  last  followed  by  an  elongated  postgular,  which  is  bordered 
on  its  anterior  inner  edge  by  a  scale  longer  than  wide;  six  lower 
labials,  the  last  largest. 


Fig.  28.  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider).  Field  Mus.  No.  853,  Enter- 
prise. Florida.  A.  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  about  25  mm.;  width,  about  26  mm. 


Scales  on  body,  save  in  postaxillary  region,  parallel;  no  (or  very 
slight)  differences  in  size  of  the  scales  about  the  middle  of  body. 
There  are  24  to  26  scales  around  the  ear.  Scales  in  a  row  about 
neck  behind  ear  35  to  42,  the  higher  counts  most  frequent ;  about 
constricted  portion  of  neck  33  to  36,  thirty-four  being  most  fre- 
quent; about  body  in  axillary  region  38  to  45  rows;  about  middle 
of  body  30  to  32  occurring  with  about  equal  frequency  (very  rarely 
a  little  higher  or  lower).  Widened  subcaudals  vary  from  100  to 
106.  Six  scales  border  the  anterior  edge  of  vent,  the  median  pair 
distinctly  enlarged,  the  outer  scales  overlapping  inner;  lateral  post- 
anal scute  usually  somewhat  enlarged  and  differentiated  in  males; 
about  twenty  scales  about  arm  insertion;  outer  wrisl  plate  or  tubercle 
strongly  enlarged;  sole  with  a  group  of  various-sized,  enlarged,  pad- 
like tubercles;  lamellar  formula  of  fingers:  6;  10;  12;  14;  8. 
Twenty-four  scales  about  insertion  of  leg;  heel  usually  bordered  by 


216  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

four  padlike  scales  not  in  contact  medially;  usually  three  pad- 
like tubercles  on  sole  posteriorly;  the  outer  scales  of  sole  strongly 
imbricated,  flat,  the  inner  scales  small,  granular  or  tubercular; 
intercalated  scales  on  outer  side  of  fourth  toe  extending  the  length 
of  the  two  basal  phalanges,  and  all  or  part  of  third.  Lamellar 
formula  for  toes:    8;  11;  14;  19;  14. 

Head  in  young  and  females  normal;  in  old  and  adult  males  it 
becomes  greatly  widened  behind  the  ear;  in  old  males  the  width  of 
the  head  exceeds  considerably  the  length. 

Color.  Young,  deep  black  above,  with  a  tail  deep  blue,  slightly 
ultramarine  below.  A  median  greenish  or  (bluish  posteriorly)  light 
line  bifurcating  anteriorly  on  the  nuchals,  the  branches  reuniting 
on  the  frontonasal  or  supranasals;  the  line  extends  about  one  third 
the  length  of  the  tail.  The  dorsolateral  line  begins  on  the  first 
superciliary,  passes  back  along  the  sides  of  the  body  and  continues 
from  one  third  to  one  half  the  length  of  the  tail,  occupying  the 
middle  part  of  the  fourth  scale  row  the  greater  part  of  its  length; 
a  lateral  line  begins  on  the  presuboculars,  curves  under  the  eye,  and 
rises  to  top  of  ear;  it  emerges  about  middle  of  posterior  edge  of  the 
ear,  continues  back  on  the  basal  half  of  the  tail,  wider  on  sides  of 
neck,  following  the  middle  of  the  seventh  scale  row  the  greater  part 
of  its  length;  sublateral  light  line  begins  on  back  edge  of  lower 
jaw,  runs  to  shoulder  where  it  is  interrupted,  then  follows  back  along 
the  tenth  row  or  edges  of  the  ninth  and  tenth  to  the  hind  leg,  where 
it  is  interrupted;  it  is  discernible  a  short  distance  on  the  tail.  This 
line  is  less  intense  than  the  others.  Occasionally,  whitish  spots  on 
the  forearm  and  a  postfemoral  light  line,  sometimes  reaching  the 
foot ;  dorsal  lamellae  of  the  toes  with  lighter  areas ;  first  four  labials 
light,  the  lower  part  of  the  posterior  labials  dark;  chin,  cream;  belly, 
bluish-gray.  The  dorsal  lines  are  usually  greenish-white  anteriorly, 
but  posteriorly  they  may  be  light  blue  or  blue-white;  underside  of 
limbs  grayish-white;  more  rarely  they  appear  cream  or  light  tan. 

Young  adults  have  the  ground  color  lighter,  some  of  the  darker 
pigment  remaining,  usually  forming  dark  lines  along  the  median 
and  dorsolateral  light  lines.  The  dark  area  between  the  dorsolateral 
and  lateral  light  lines  remains  dark  but  usually  changes  to  a  dark 
brown,  more  or  less  uniform,  but  occasionally  flecked  with  olive. 

From  this  time  on  the  color  of  the  males  tends  to  diverge  from  the 
juvenile  character,  the  stripes  losing  their  distinctness  and  the  dorsal 
color  becoming  more  or  less  uniform  brown  or  olive,  or  even  olive 
flecked  with  darker  color.    The  lateral  brown  stripe  is  usually  more 


Taylor:    The  Genus  1m  meces 


217 


u 

-a 

_ 
d 

o 

C72 


CO 


CO 
<» 
O 


J 


a> 

■— 

03 

c3 


.2~ 

ZcM 

r/i90 


.-Tog 

R©C> 


Zcm 

r/i00 


^00 
|3 


<<CM 

IZcm 
~X 


Zcm   M 
,:X   >> 


^CO 


/.  - 


cm 


Hi 


<N 


lo       lO 

*JI      1-1 


o 


—     —     — 

CM         T 


o 

M 


o      — 

CM        CM 


C       —       i- 

eo     •«»"     ■- 


o 
CM 


00 
CM 


OS 


Cl 


N       O       h       t(i       lO       00 
i-H        (M        rr        — i        i-i        ™ 


co 


CO 
CO 


OS       CO 
O        OS 


CO 


CO        CM         -H 

i-i        CM        CO 


O        CM         CM         CO        t*-        O 

_        „        _        rt        CI        — 


CM        -c 


CO 


CM        OS       W 

i-         ■-!         CM 


C5        O        —1 


■z      CI 

i-i       CM 


o 


©     -r     © 


CO       —       X 

i—         CM 


co 

CO 


CM 

CO 


CM 

CO 


1-1      t- 

CO        t- 


CM 

CO 


© 

CO 


o 


CO 


CM       CM 

m     © 


c-i 


o 


-/- 


3 
O 

s 

03 


O 

a 

X 


o 

=1 
o 


o 

— 


— 


~     -     £ 

a 


■a 


o 


c 
o 

(J 


CM 

CO 


00 

in 


s 


0 

o 


3 

33 


o 
O 

e 
o 
to 


-1 

/ 

1.-5 

6 

s 

6 

U 

c 

o.m 

Ov 

< 

= 

CU 

a 

a> 

I- 

■a 

- 

as 

CO 

.a 

B 

O  H- ( 

en 

o 

s 

00 

> 

l> 

.. 

— 

■j 

= 

0 

a 

h- 

- 

~ 

>. 

t- 

-1 

< 

- 

:: 

M 

1 

■■z 

X 

a 

■a 

— 

. 

- 

= 

— 

s 

— 

— 

-. 

•c 

en 

CM 

11  X 

— 

H 

•- 

-, 

— 

- 

- 

— 

- 

/ 

" 

_ 

- 

2 

3 
- 

r 

■r. 

2 

218 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


or  less  distinctly  retained,  and  the  lateral  light  line  continues  to  be 
more  or  less  discernible.    The  head  becomes  red. 

The  females  tend  to  retain  more  of  the  details  of  juvenile  colora- 
tion, and  the  light  stripes  are  discernible  in  the  largest  specimens 
examined.  They,  however,  become  tan  or  a  different  shade  of  olive; 
the  ground  color  becomes  lighter  and  usually  is  olive,  flecked  with 
black.    The  lateral  stripe  is  very  distinct. 

Variation.  In  my  study  of  this  species  I  have  examined  278  speci- 
mens, 20  states  and  more  than  117  localities  being  represented.  In 
a  species  having  so  large  a  distribution,  it  was  surprising  that  no 
well-established  variation  in  squamation  was  discerned.  True,  in 
certain  localities  it  is  possible  to  demonstrate  certain  average  differ- 
ences.    Thus,  a  larger  percentage  of  specimens  in  the  southeastern 


Fig.  29.  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider).  K.U.  No.  7809;  Imboden,  Law- 
rence Co.,  Arkansas.  Female.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.    Actual  head  length,  17  mm.;  width,  18  mm. 

part  of  the  range  have  the  lower  secondary  temporal  enclosed 
posteriorly  by  the  tertiary  temporal  and  the  seventh  labial;  how- 
ever, numerous  examples  show  a  different  arrangement ;  in  the  speci- 
mens from  the  more  western  parts  the  above  arrangement  occurs 
much  less  frequently.  In  a  previous  paper  (Taylor,  1932)  I  re- 
garded that  this  difference,  together  with  the  absence  of  the  sub- 
lateral  line,  might  warrant  the  separation  of  the  eastern  from  the 
western  form.  After  an  examination  of  the  series  mentioned  I  have 
concluded  that  this  is,  at  least  at  the  present,  not  warranted. 

The  following  data  on  occurrence  of  this  character  were  taken  in 
103  specimens  from  numerous  localities:  Florida,  8  with  lower 
secondary  temporal  enclosed,  one  not  enclosed;  Georgia  7,  4;  Ala- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  219 

bama  2,  0;  South  Carolina  7.  2;  Virginia  3,  2;  Ohio  0,  4;  Maryland 
0,  1;  West  Virginia  1,  0;  Mi->i>sippi  0,  1;  Indiana  1,  5;  Illinois  0,  2; 
Oklahoma  2,  19;  Arkansas  0,  14;  Louisiana  0,  2;  Tennessee  0,  8; 
Kentucky  0,  1;  Texas  0,  2;  Missouri  0,  4. 

The  sublateral  line  is  lacking  in  all  younger  specimens  in  the 
territory  west  of  the  Appalachian  Mountains,  but  whether  this  is 
invariably  true  cannot  be  ascertained  in  all  specimens,  due  to  the 
fact  that  this  character  is  obliterated  in  adult  males. 

The  number  of  scales  from  the  parietals  to  above  vent  varies 
from  54  to  60,  the  numbers  57  and  58  occurring  with  practically 
equal  frequency,  each  nearly  three  times  as  frequently  as  59  or  56. 
Specimens  having  54  and  55  are  from  northern  Arkansas.  The 
higher  numbers  are  also  present  in  the  same  lot  from  the  same 
locality.  The  widened  subcaudal  scales  from  anus  to  tip  of  tail 
vary  between  93  and  100,  usually  96  or  97.  The  extra  pair  of 
nuchals  is  present  in  about  four  cases;  however,  a  single  extra 
nuchal  on  one  side  or  the  other  is  about  twice  as  frequent  in  oc- 
currence. The  frontal  is  separated  from  the  frontonasal  in  about 
95  per  cent  of  the  specimens;  a  single  postmental  occurs  in  about 
two  percent  of  the  specimens. 

The  number  of  superciliaries  in  180  counts  (90  specimens)  vary 
from  seven  to  eleven,  occurring  in  the  following  order  of  frequency: 
7.  2 ;  8,  58 ;  9,  80 ;  10.  36 ;  and  11,  4  times.  Eight  is  of  more  frequent 
occurrence  in  western  specimens.  Subdigital  lamellae  under  the 
fourth  toe  vary  between  16  and  20;  in  104  specimens  16  occurring 
39  times;  17.  94;  18,  62;  19,  12;  and  20.  once.  There  is  no  regional 
difference  apparent.  The  postsuboculars  vary  from  four  to  six.  In 
159  specimens  four  occurs  on  one  or  both  sides  79  times;  5,  159 
times;  6,  3  times. 

The  number  of  scale  rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body  varies 
from  28  to  34.  which  represents  a  range  more  or  less  typical  of 
certain  other  species  of  the  genus.  The  numbers  from  28  to  34 
occurred  with  the  following  frequency  in  136  specimens  where  counts 
were  made:  1.  1,  56,  13,  53,  5.  7.  Thus,  30  rows,  occurring  56 
times,  are  but  slightly  more  numerous  than  32  rows,  occurring  53 
times.  The  5  specimens  with  33.  and  7  with  34,  are  not  confined 
to  any  particular  region,  but  are  from  widely  scattered  localities. 

lit  marks.  The  separation  of  this  species  from  the  two  related 
species,  fasciatus  and  inexpectatus,  is  not  difficult  if  one  takes  the 
time  to  compare  the  specimens  with  the  descriptions  here  given.    In 


220  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

the  recent  edition  of  the  Check  List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Reptiles,  by 
Stejneger  and  Barbour,  3d  Ed.,  1933,  p.  80,  the  following  footnote 
occurs:  "Two  additional  species  of  Eumeces,  viz.  E.  inexpectatus 
and  E.  laticeps,  have  been  recently  recognized  by  E.  H.  Taylor 
(Univ.  Kansas  Science  Bull.,  Vol.  22,  No.  13,  1932,  p.  251,  and  Univ. 
Kansas  Science  Bull.,  Vol.  22,  No.  13,  1932,  p.  263).  The  evidence 
thus  far  adduced  does  not  support  the  validity  of  these  forms." 

Since  the  above  statement  has  been  published  I  have  discussed 
the  question  with  both  Doctor  Stejneger  and  Doctor  Barbour, 
supplying  still  further  evidence  for  the  recognition  of  the  forms. 
For  so  long  a  time  Cope's  conclusions  (1900)  in  regard  to  this  group 
have  held  sway  that  it  is  difficult  to  realize  that  a  different  interpre- 
tation is  tenable,  inasmuch  as  Cope's  keen  discernment  rarely  over- 
looked forms  worthy  of  taxonomic  distinction.  Even  with  the  desire 
to  recognize  the  three  forms,  and  trying  to  verify  their  status,  the 
herpetologist  is  still  doubtful  that  it  is  warranted  when,  on  examin- 
ing a  jar  of  specimens,  all  of  which  come  from  the  same  locality 
(not  impossibly  collected  on  the  same  date  and  by  a  single  col- 
lector), he  finds  three  specimens  which  have  the  characters  of  the 
three  proposed  forms.  The  conclusion  based  on  experience  is  that 
he  is  dealing  with  a  variable  form  and  the  characters  are  unworthy 
of  even  subspecific  recognition.  Another  jar  examined  may  show 
specimens  which  exhibit  characters  of  only  two  species.  I  say  it 
seems  more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  one  is  dealing  with  a  variable 
form,  rather  than  with  three  separate  species,  since  it  is  rare  in 
one's  experience  to  find  three  species  occupying  the  same  general 
range,  having  enough  characters  in  common  to  cause  a  herpetologist 
to  mistake  them  as  one,  and  having  at  the  same  time  distinguishing 
features,  perhaps  less  obvious,  that  would  warrant  their  being  re- 
garded as  totally  distinct  species. 

However,  I  believe,  unquestionably,  that  this  is  exactly  the  state 
of  affairs  with  regard  to  the  forms  fasciatus,  laticeps  and  inex- 
pectatus. I  likewise  believe  that  anyone  who  has  access  to  sufficient 
material  and  who  will  examine  the  material  with  sufficient  care 
to  note  all  characters,  cannot  fail  to  be  convinced  of  the  separate 
identity  of  these  forms. 

Distribution.  The  species  occupies  in  general  the  entire  south- 
eastern part  of  the  United  States,  extending  north  to  the  southern 
parts  of  Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  Indiana  and  Missouri,  and  as  far  west 
as  eastern  Oklahoma  and  Texas. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Elmeces 


221 


Fig.  30.    Distribution  of  Eumeces  laticeps  (Schneider),  in 
Eastern  United  States. 


LOCALITY  RECORDS 
Pennsylvania:   Lancaster  Co.:  York  Furnace  (A.N.S.P.  1). 
Maryland:  Camp  Roosevelt  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

West  Virginia:   Jefferson  Co.:  xk  mi.  above  Harper's  Ferry  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Virginia:    (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Loudoun  Co.:    (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Princess  Anne  Co.:  Virginia  Beach  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Prince  William  Co.:   Manassas  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Agusta  Co.:  O'Connell's  Place  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Gloucester  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Rockbridge  Co.:   Natural  Bridge  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

North  Carolina: 

Cartaret  Co.:   Beaufort  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Columbus  Co.:  Lake  Waccamaw  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Wake  Co.:  Raleigh  (Baylor  1). 

South  Carolina: 

Edgefield  Co.:   1  mi.  NW  Trenton  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Beaufort  Co.:   Hiltonhead  (A.N.S.P.  1) ;  Port  Royal  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Anderson  Co.:   Anderson  (A.N.S.P.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Dillon  Co.:  Little  Pee  Dee  River  (A.M.N.H.  2). 

Charleston  Co.:   Charleston  (M.C.Z.  1;  Holbrook's  specimens)  (Field  1) 
(U.S.N.M.  1);  Mount  Pleasant,  Christ  Church  Parish  (U.S.N.M.  4). 
Berkeley  Co.:  St.  Stephen  (Toledo  Zool.  Soc.  1);  Oakley  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Richland  Co.:  Columbus  (U.S.N.M.  1). 


222  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Georgia:    (A.N.S.P.  1)  (Cornell  1). 

Cobb  Co.:   Roswell  (M.C.Z.  3). 

Dade  Co.:  Sand  Mt.  Trenton  ( A.M.N .H.  1). 

Grady  Co.:  Beachton  (Field  2). 

Thomas  Co.:  Thomasville  (A.N.S.P.  3). 

Turner  Co.:  Ashburn  (A.M.N.H.  2). 

Lowndes   Co.:    Valdosta    (A.M.N.H.  2);    Melrose    (Mich.   1);    "a   little 

north  of  Valdosta"  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Charlton  Co.:    Cypress  Bayou,  Okefmokee  Swamp  (A.M.N.H.  1);  Oke- 

finokee  (Cornell  18);  East  of  Folkston  (Cornell  1);  St.  Petersbourg 

(Cornell  1). 
Heard  Co.:   Houston  (Mich.  2). 
Camden  Co.:  St.  Mary's  (M.C.Z.  2)  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Chatham  Co.:   Savannah  (M.C.Z.  2). 
Fulton  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  4). 
Liberty  Co.:   Riceboro  (U.S.N.M.  3). 
Berrien  Co.:   Nashville  (U.S.N.M.  2). 
Alabama:    (A.N.S.P.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1);  "Northern  Alabama"  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Perry  Co.:   Uniontown  (A.N.S.P.  1). 
Butler  Co.:   Pigeon  River  (A.N.S.P.  2). 
Calhoun  Co.:   Anniston  (M.C.Z.  2). 

Montgomery  Co.:   Montgomery  (U.S.N.M.  1);  Barachias  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Baldwin  Co.:   Perdido  Bay  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Mississippi:    (U.S.N.M.  3). 

Adams  Co.:    (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Tennessee: 

Shelby  Co.:  Raleigh  (A.N.S.P.  2). 

fObionCo.:   Reelfoot  Lake,  Samburg  (A.N.S.P.  3). 

Henry  Co.:   Henry  (Mich.  2). 

Houston  Co.:  Danville  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Knox  Co.:  Knoxville  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Montgomery  Co.:   Clarksville  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Florida:    (A.N.S.P.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Volusia   Co.:    Volusia    (A.N.S.P.    1);    Enterprise?    (Field    1);    DeLand 

(U.S.N.M.  1)  (Field  1)  (Cornell  3). 
Marion  Co.:    (Field  1)  (Cornell  3) ;  Eureka  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
Duval  Co.:  Near  Jacksonville  (A.M.N.H.  4);  Arlington  (M.C.Z.  1) 

(U.S.  N.  M.2). 
Alachua   Co.:     Near   Gainesville    (A.M.N.H.    1);    Alachua    (Mich.    1); 

Gainesville  (Mich.  2)  ;  Micanopy  Road  (Mich.  1). 
Lake  Co.:    (Mich.  1). 
Leon  Co.:   Tallahassee  (Mich.  1). 
Franklin  Co.:   Apalachicola  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Nassau  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Columbia  Co.:   Blounts  Ferry  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Monroe  Co.:   Indian  Key  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Lee  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Unidentified  localities  as  regards  counties:    Indian  River,  Fla.  (U.S.N.M. 
1);     Camp    Baracca     (M.C.Z.    1);     St.    John's    River,    Beecher    Pt. 

(U.S.N.M.  1). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  223 

Louisiana:    (A.N.S.P.  I). 

Orh  ans  Parish  (or  county) :   Gentilly  (Ottawa  Uni.  1). 

St.  Mary's  Co.:   Morgan  City  (U.S.N.M.  2). 

Caddo  Co.:  Gayle  (Field  1)  (Baylor  2) ;  Frierson  (Baylor  1). 

-     Landry  Co.:   Grand  Coteau  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

St.  Tammany  Co.:  Covington  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

//.,  ria  Co.:    Avery  Island  (C.A.S.  1). 

Texas: 

Bexar  Co.:    (Baylor  1). 

Dallas  Co.:   Dallas  (A.N.S.P.  1)  (M.C.Z.  2)  (Cornell  1). 

Washington  Co.:   Clifton  Bosque?  (Cornell  1). 

Matagorda  Co.:   Matagorda  (Cornell  3). 

Victoria  Co.:   Black  Bayou  (Cornell  6). 

McL(  nnan  Co.:   Asa  (Baylor  7);  Waco  (Baylor  1). 

Bosque  Co.:    (Baylor  3). 

Liberty  Co.:   Cleveland  (Baylor  2). 

Unidentified  for  county:   Brazos  River  (U.S.N.M.  1.  Shumard  Coll.). 

Oklahoma: 

McCurtain  Co.:    (O.U.  4). 

Delaware  Co.:    (O.U.  6). 

Choctaw  Co.:   (O.U.  2). 

Pushmataha  Co.:    (O.U.  1). 

Leflore  Co.:    (O.U.  3)  (Cornell  4). 

Latimer  Co.:    (O.U.  5). 

Unidentified:   Old  Fort  Cobb  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Arkansas  : 

Logan  Co.:   Petit  Jean  Mt.  (or  Yell  Co.)  (A.N.S.P.  1). 

Lawrence  Co.:  Imboden  (K.U.  5)  (Field  2). 

Sevier  Co.:  Lakesburg  (A.M.N.H.2). 

Jefferson  Co.:   New  Gascony  (A.N.S.P.  2). 

Sebastian  Co.:    Fort  Smith  (U.S.N.M.  1,  Shumard;  Orig.  No.  3176). 

Garland  Co.:  Hot  Springs  (U.S.N.M.  1)  (Baylor  1). 

Ashley  Co.:  Wilmot  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Miller  Co.:    (Baylor  2). 

Ohio: 

Hocking  <  'o.:   Good  Hope  Twp.  (Toledo  Zool.  Soc.  1) ;  Clear  Creek 

(Ohio  State  Mus.  1). 
Darke  Co.:   Greenville  (Cornell  1). 
Athens  Co.:   Athens  (Ohio  U.  1). 
Hamilton  Co.:   Cincinnati  (Baylor  1). 

Indiana: 

Pike  Co.:  Stendel  (Field  1). 

htfersonCo.:   Madison  (M.C.Z.  2);  Hanover  (A.N.S.P.  1)  (Mich.  1). 

Wells  Co.:  Bluffton  (Mich.  1). 

Vandi  rb<  rg  Co.:   Evansville,  7  mi.  SW  (Mich.  1). 
Illinois:    Southern  111.  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Randolph  Co.:   Chester  (Mich.  1). 

Monroe  Co.:  Red  Bud  (Mich.  1). 

Jackson  Co.:   Murphysboro  (Mich.  1). 


224  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Alexander  Co.:   Olive  Branch  (Field  2). 

St.  Clair  Co.:  Belleville  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Wabash  Co.:   Mt.  Carmel  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Missouri  : 

Pemiscot  Co.:    (Mich.  1). 

Butler  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  2). 

Stone  Co.:    (A.M.N.H.  1)  (Cornell  1). 

St.  Louis  Co.:  St.  Louis  (U.S.N.M.  4). 

Cooper  Co.:  Boonville  (M.C.Z.  1). 

Montgomery  Co.:    ?Bigspring  Park  (Mich.  1). 
Kentucky:    (M.C.Z.  2). 

Fulton  Co.:   Hickman  (U.S.N.M.  2). 

Kenton  Co.:    (B.H.F.M.  1);  Independence  (B.H.F.M.  1). 

Grant  Co.:    Crittenden  (C.S.N.H.  3). 

Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor 

(Plate  16;    Figs.  31,  32) 
SYNONYMY* 

1839.    Plestiodon    quinquelineatus    Holbrook.       North    Amer.     Herp.,    Ill,     1839,    pp.     39-41 

(part.),  pi.  VI   (the  plate  is  a  picture  of  a  specimen  of  this  species);    and  2d  Ed.,  II, 

1842,  pp.  121-124  (part.),  pi.  XVII. 
1879.    Eumeces  quinquelineatus  Bocourt.     Miss.   Sci.   Mex.,  Liv.  VI,  1879,  pp.   426-428;    Liv. 

VII,   1881,  pi.   22E,  figs.   10,   10a,   10b  and  10c  (part.). 
1932.    Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor.     Uni.  Kans.  Sci.  Bull.,  XX,  No.   13,  Oct.   1,   1932   (Bull. 

Uni.    Kansas,    Vol.    XXXIII,    No.    10,    1932),    pp.    251-261,    pi.    XVII,    figs.    1-5    (type 

description;    type  locality  Citrus  Co.,  Fla.). 

History.  This  species,  apparently  common  over  the  southeastern 
part  of  the  United  States,  has  long  been  identified  under  the  name 
Eumeces  quinquelineatus  and  Eumeces  fasciatus.  Whether  or  not 
this  form  was  actually  described  by  Linnaeus  cannot  absolutely 
be  proved  or  disproved.  Since  fasciatus  should  be  used  for  the 
widespread  species,  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  neither  name  can  be 
applied  to  this  form.  The  brief  description  of  quinquelineatus 
given  by  Linnaeus  is  so  inadequate  that  it  applies  equally  well  to 
all  three  of  the  species  occurring  in  the  type  locality — fasciatus, 
laticeps  and  inexpectatus.  As  the  types  of  the  Linnaean  species 
are,  so  far  as  can  be  ascertained,  lost,  it  is  obvious  that  there  can 
never  be  an  absolutely  certain  fixation  of  the  name  quinquelineatus. 

The  only  attempt  to  fix  the  name  quinquelineatus  to  any  one  of 
the  three  species  is  that  of  Holbrook  (1838  and  1842),  who  applies 
the  name  to  this  species  at  least  in  part,  and  gives  a  figure  of  a 
specimen  of  this  species.  It  is  obvious  that  this  is  an  arbitrary 
choice.  Moreover,  from  the  data  given  in  the  discussion  and  the 
distribution,  it   is  apparent  that  it  is  in  a  measure  a  composite 


*  It  is  certain  that  many  of  the  references  listed  under  laticeps  and  fasciatus  refer,  at  least 
in  part,  to  this  species. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  225 

form.     Some  of  Holbrook's  specimens  in  the  Academy  of  Natural 
Sciences,  Philadelphia,  with  this  name,  are  Eumeces  laticeps. 

When  I  discerned  that  three  distinct  species  occurred,  the  ques- 
tion arose  as  to  whether  the  Linnaean  name  quinquelineatus  or 
some  later  name  might  apply  to  this  third  form.  After  considerable 
research  in  the  literature  (see  discussion  under  fasciatus) ,  it  seemed 
that  none  of  these  could  be  applied  with  any  degree  of  certainty, 
and  a  new  name,  incxpectatus,  was  erected. 

At  that  time  I  had  available  only  36  specimens.  To  date  I  have 
been  able  to  study  226  specimens,  all  of  which  agree,  with  that 
chosen  as  the  type,  in  all  essential  details.  These  additional  speci- 
mens have  added  but  little  to  our  knowledge  of  distribution,  save 
that  the  southern  Virginia  records  take  it  a  little  farther  north  than 
was  known,  and  those  from  Louisiana  a  little  farther  to  the  south- 
west. Numerous  specimens  have  since  been  examined  from  Alabama 
and  Georgia,  as  well  as  from  those  states  where  its  presence  was 
definitely  known  previously.  (Consult  the  history  of  Eumeces 
fasciatus  in  this  work  for  a  more  detailed  account  of  the  earlier 
names  than  is  given  here.) 

Diagnosis.  A  member  of  the  Fasciatus  group,  with  characters 
somewhat  intermediate  between  Eumeces  laticeps  and  E.  fasciatus. 
Young  with  median  light  line  from  head  to  tail,  bifurcating  on  the 
nuchal,  disappearing  in  adult  males;  a  distinct  dorsolateral  line 
usually,  but  not  invariably,  remaining  evident  in  adult  males;  a 
broad  lateral  brown  stripe,  bordered  by  a  light  lateral  line,  usually 
not  continuous  on  the  labials;  young  with  (usually)  a  sublateral 
light  line.  Upper  labials  seven  or  eight,  last  largest,  separated  from 
the  ear  by  an  elongate  lower  postlabial,  with  two  smaller  post- 
labials  above  it;  usually  one  pair  of  nuchals;  one  postnasal;  two 
postmentals;  median  preanal  scales  relatively  small;  30-32  scale 
rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body;  subcaudal  scales  not  distinctly 
enlarged.    Young  with  a  blue  tail. 

Description  of  type  (Kansas  University  Museum,  No.  *•_»::•_'. 
Citrus  Co.,  Fla.).  The  portion  of  the  rostral  visible  above  a  little 
less  than  half  the  bulk  of  the  frontoparietal;  supranasal  large, 
forming  a  relatively  short  median  suture,  touching  postnasal  and 
anterior  loreal  laterally;  frontonasal  much  broader  than  long,  touch- 
ing the  anterior  loreal  laterally;  the  sutures  with  the  supranasals 
somewhat  shorter  than  those  with  prefrontals;  latter  large,  broadly 
in  contact  medially,  forming  subequal  sutures  with  the  first  supra- 
ocular and  first  superciliary;  frontal  about  one  fourth  longer  than 

15—1123 


226 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


its  distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  distinctly  wider  anteriorly 
than  posteriorly,  the  sides  gradually  sloping,  in  contact  with  three 
supraoculars;  frontoparietals  moderate  in  size,  forming  a  suture 
half  their  length;  parietals  very  broad,  not  enclosing  the  inter- 
parietal; a  pair  of  large  nuchals;  nasal  divided,  the  posterior  part 
forming  a  narrow  rim  about  nostril;  a  relatively  large  postnasal; 
two  loreals,  the  anterior  very  little  higher  than  the  posterior,  which 
is  elongated;  two  presuboculars;  four-five  postsuboculars;  primary 
temporal  quadrangular,  nearly  square;  upper  secondary  temporal 
elongate,  widened  but  little  posteriorly;  lower  secondary  temporal 


Fig.  31.  Eumeces  incxpectatus  Taylor.  K.U.  No.  8232  (type) ;  Citrus 
Co.,  Florida.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  13.2  mm.;  width,  12  mm. 

nearly  triangular,  the  longest  side  next  to  the  labial;  an  elongate 
tertiary  temporal  following  behind  the  secondaries;  nine  super- 
ciliaries,  the  first  and  last  largest. 

A  small  preocular;  two  small  postoculars;  large  opaque  plates 
on  lower  eyelid  separated  from  subocular  by  four  rows  of  tubercles; 
only  the  four  median  upper  palpebral  scales  form  sutures  with  the 
superciliaries;  eight  upper  labials,  first  with  posterior  part  much 
elevated  above  the  succeeding  four  which  precede  the  subocular; 
seventh  distinctly  smaller  than  eighth,  which  is  the  largest  of  the 
series;  this  followed  by  an  elongate  curved  postlabial  which  enters 
ear,  with  two  small  scales  in  contact  with  it  above  (on  left  side  the 
posterior  is  small) ;  three  small  free  lobules  on  anterior  border  of 
ear;  six  lower  labials;  mental  with  much  greater  labial  extent  than 
rostral;  two  postmentals;  chinshields  typical,  the  last  followed  by 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  227 

two  scales,  the  outer  Large,  elongate,  the  inner  small,  variable,  a 
little  longer  than  wide;  37  scales  about  neck  behind  ear;  31  row- 
about  narrow  part  of  neck;  40  rows  about  body  in  axillary  region; 
32  scale  rows  about  middle  of  body;  21  rows  about  base  of  tail; 
lateral  scales  parallel  save  in  axillary  region,  a  little  larger  than 
dorsals;  six  or  eight  preanals,  the  median  only  moderately  enlarged, 
outer  scales  overlapping  inner;  subcaudal  scales  not  or  but  slightly 
differentiated  in  shape  or  width  from  the  other  caudal  scales;  scales 
about  insertion  of  arm,  15;  a  well-defined,  large,  wrist  tubercle; 
12  to  15  enlarged  padlike  tubercles  on  palm;  lamellar  formula  for 
fingers:  6;  10;  13;  13;  S.  About  20  scales  around  insertion  of  hind 
limb:  heel  bordered  by  four  or  five  contiguous  plates,  with  only 
one  or  two  somewhat  enlarged  tubercles  anterior  to  the  four  heel 
plates.  Lamellar  formula  for  toes:  7;  11;  13;  18;  11.  Intercalated 
scales  on  fourth  toe  not  reaching  beyond  the  basal  phalanx. 

Head  slightly  bulging  behind  eye;  ear  opening  moderate;  limbs 
well  developed,  the  hind  leg  reaching  elbow  of  adpressed  forelimb. 
The  pits  on  the  scales  are  very  small,  punctate,  occurring  on  sides 
of  neck  and  body,  on  posthumeral  and  postfemoral  regions  and  sides 
of  tail.  In  the  neck  region  scales  may  have  as  many  as  15  pits 
(much  more  numerous  and  smaller  than  in  fasciatus) .  In  older 
specimens  these  become  obsolete,  as  they  are  in  the  type.  However 
in  certain  of  the  paratypes  they  are  quite  distinct. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  Above  generally  bronze,  the  scales  showing 
certain  metallic  reflections;  many  scales  showing  a  somewhat  darker 
area:  the  top  of  head  somewhat  yellowish-brown;  a  median  lighter 
line,  whitish  or  yellowish,  dimly  visible,  bifurcating  on  the  nuchal, 
the  line  still  visible  to  the  prefrontals;  a  dorsolateral  light  line  ex- 
tending from  supraoculars  far  onto  the  side  of  the  tail;  the  line 
following  outer  edge  of  fourth  and  inner  third  of  the  fifth  row  of 
scales,  bordered  above  by  a  fine  row  of  small  black  dots.  A  broad, 
brown  stripe  on  side  of  head,  somewhat  deeper  brown  than  on  top 
of  head,  growing  gradually  darker  on  neck,  and  becoming  almost 
black  along  side  of  body  and  tail ;  a  lateral  light  line  beginning  on 
the  presuboculars,  forming  at  firsl  a  series  of  four  more  or  l< 
disconnected  white  spots,  the  la-t  reaching  top  of  car;  it  emerges 
from  lower  half  of  ear  and  continues  above  hind  limb  on  the  side 
of  the  tail,  very  strongly  defined  its  entire  Length;  lateral  light  line 
bordered  below  by  a  dark  -tripe;  no  sublateral  light  line  visible  at 
this  age;  chin  and  lower  labials  flesh  colored;  venter  grayish,  grow- 
ing bluish-gray  posteriorly:   a   light  line  on  the  posterior  side  of 


228 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


femur;  toes  and  feet  lighter  than  venter,  the  scales  darker  edged 
on  toes. 

Color  of  female  (paratype) :  Above  very  dark  brown,  with  the 
median  light  line  bifurcating  on  nuchals,  continuing  to  rostral, 
bordered  by  deep  black  lines;  bronzy  anteriorly,  blue-black  poste- 
riorly ;  dorsolateral  line  narrow,  running  through  middle  of  fifth 
scale  row,  greenish-white  with  metallic  reflections,  bluish  poste- 
riorly; lateral  stripe  intensely  black  on  sides,  brownish  on  head; 
lateral  line  prominent,  wider  anteriorly;  otherwise  similar  to  male. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor 


Museum. 
Number . 


Snout  to  vent 

Snout  to  foreleg.  .  . 

Snout  to  ear 

Tail 

Width  of  head 

Length  of  head 

Axilla  to  groin 

Postanal  tail  width 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 


K.U. 
8232 


66 
26 

15 

reg. 

12 

13.2 
36 
9 
20 
28 


K.U. 
8233 


62 
22 
14 
reg. 
10 

11  .4 
30 
7.5 
19 
25 


Mich. 
61632 


79 
29 
17 
128* 
15 

15.2 
38 
9 
24 
33 


Mich. 
61634 


73 
28 
17.3 
181* 
13.6 
15 
37 
10 

21.5 
31 


Mich. 
61754 


77 
26 
17.1 
115* 
13 

14.7 
41 
9 
22 
31.5 


♦Partly  regenerated.  8232,  type;  8233,  paratvpe ;  61632,  Michigan  U.  Mus.,  Hillsboro, 
Fla. ;    61634,  near  Gulfport,  Pinelas  Co.,  Fla. ;    61754,  Cabbage  Key,  Fla. 

Variation.  Detailed  scale  counts  were  made  on  90  specimens, 
while  data  on  certain  scales  were  recorded  in  a  larger  number.  The 
following  variation  is  evident:  Scales  in  a  line  from  parietals  to 
above  anus,  55-59,  the  number  55  occurring  6  times;  56,  12  times; 
57,  39  times;  58,  23  times;  and  59,  10  times.  The  variation  has  no 
geographical  significance.  The  scale  rows  about  the  middle  of  the 
body  vary  from  29  to  36;  they  are  normally  30,  31,  or  32.  In  108 
counts,  30  occurs  24  times;  31,  24  times;  and  32,  47  times.  Two 
specimens  have  29,  one  33;  ten  have  34,  and  one  has  36.  These 
specimens  with  very  high  numbers  are  from  various  localities.  The 
specimen  having  36  scale  rows  is  from  Little  Sarasota  Bay-  Florida 
(U.S.N.M.  9953).  The  labials  are  either  seven  or  eight;  in  106 
counts,  the  number  7-7  occurs  46  times;  8-8  occurs  35  times;  and 
the  number  7-8  occurs  25  times.    The  postmental  is  invariable. 

In  125  specimens,  103  have  the  prefrontals  in  contact;  22  have 
them  separated,  but  usually  the  separation  is  very  small.     In  one 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  229 

case  they  are  separated  by  a  small  intercalated  scale.  The  nuchals 
were  observed  in  92  specimens.  The  arrangement  1-1  (one  pair) 
occurs  in  61  specimens;  1-2  in  22  specimens;  2-2  (two  pairs)  in  7 
specimens;  and  3-2,  in  two.  The  number  of  lamellae  under  the 
fourth  toe  was  counted  188  times  (94  specimens).  The  number  14 
occurs  once;  15,  five  times;  16,  37  times;  17,  88  times;  18,  37  times; 
19,  10  times;  and  20,  twice. 

Superciliaries  vary  from  7  to  10,  seven  occurring  10  times;  8,  66 
times;  9,  83  times;  and  10,  seven  times,  in  84  specimens.  The 
number  of  postsuboculars  varies  from  three  to  five.  The  numbers 
3-3  occur  three  times;  4-3,  three  times;  4-4,  69  times;  4-5,  seven 
times;  5-5,  ten  times. 

The  limbs,  when  adpressed,  invariably  overlap;  in  old  males 
the  average  is  about  12  millimeters.  The  scales  separating  the 
last  labial  from  the  ear  and  the  lower  secondary  temporal  show 
some  variation;  occasionally  there  is  only  a  single  scale  above  the 
elongate  postlabial;  more  frequently  two. 

Color  variations  seem  to  be  those  dependent  on  age  or  sex.  Here, 
as  in  related  species  of  the  fasciatus  group,  the  adult  males  undergo 
a  complete  or  nearly  complete  color  evolution  from  the  brilliant 
lined  young  with  azure  tails  to  dull-colored,  brownish-olive  speci- 
mens with  orange  or  reddish  head  in  old  age.  The  brown  lateral 
stripe  appears  to  remain  very  distinct  in  the  old.  The  females 
retain  in  much  greater  degree  the  juvenile  pattern. 

Coloration  of  young  (from  University  Michigan  Museum,  No. 
61629;  from  near  Gulfport,  Pinelas  Co.,  Fla.).  General  ground  color 
deep  black;  a  very  narrow  median  greenish-white  line  running  to 
nuchals.  where  it  is  slightly  separated  from  the  two  diverging  lines 
of  the  head;  posteriorly,  on  back,  median  line  light  blue  or  bluish- 
white,  becoming  a  deeper  blue  on  tail,  and  finally  lost  in  the  blue 
ground  color  of  the  latter  part  of  the  tail;  dorsolateral  line,  not 
touching  diverging  lines  of  head,  arises  separately  on  the  first 
superciliary,  continues  with  irregular  edges  over  outer  side  of  the 
supraoculars,  then  continues  along  side  of  body  to  tail,  following 
the  fifth  scale  row,  generally  greenish-white,  but  becoming  blue 
posteriorly;  first  four  labials  the  creamy  color  of  the  chin  and  lower 
labials;  lateral  white  line  arises  on  the  second  loreal,  passing  through 
the  presuboculars  and  under  eye,  crossing  the  last  two  labials  to  the 
top  of  ear,  where  it  stops;  the  line  then  begins  behind  ear  about 
middle  and  continues  back  to  tail;  lower  part  of  the  posterior 
labials  dark;  between  the  median  and  dorsolateral  lines  are  two 


230  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

dim,  narrow,  bronze-colored  lines  on  the  edges  of  the  second  and 
third  scale  rows,  visible  as  far  as  the  tail,  where  they  become  blue; 
belly  bluish-gray,  which  color  reaches  on  side  to  the  black  stripe 
which  is  below  the  lateral  line,  at  which  the  gray  is  slightly  lighter 
so  as  to  suggest  a  dim  sublateral  white  line;  tail  deep  blue,  darker 
posteriorly,  the  underside  of  tail  a  more  grayish-blue.  Chin  and 
breast  cream  color;  a  whitish  line  on  posterior  surface  of  hind  leg. 

A  second  young  specimen,  an  immature  male  (48  mm.)  (Uni- 
versity of  Michigan,  No.  61631,  from  Hillsboro  Co.,  Fla.),  already 
begins  to  show  the  brownish  coloration  on  the  side  of  the  head  and 
the  labial  line  shows  the  tendency  to  form  white  spots  on  the  brown 
color  of  the  posterior  labials;  the  throat  shows  a  slight  salmon- 
brown  suffusion.  In  general,  the  markings  are  the  same  as  in  the 
preceding  specimen.  The  bifurcating  lines  usually  do  not  actually 
contact  the  median  line  on  the  nuchals,  but  tend  to  turn  out  slightly 
at  this  point. 

Remarks.  While,  as  pointed  out,  this  form  bears  much  similarity 
to  fasciatus,  it  should  in  no  sense  be  construed  as  a  subspecies  of 
either  fasciatus  or  laticeps,  since  the  fact  that  it  occurs  through  so 
wide  a  territory  occupied  by  these  two  species  and  maintains  its 
identity,  precludes  such  an  association.  The  maximum  size  of  this 
species  is  89  millimeters  snout  to  vent;  I  have  found  four  males 
reaching  85,  and  a  single  one  reaching  to  89  millimeters  in  the  236 
specimens  examined.  It  is  slightly  larger  than  fasciatus,  but  much 
smaller  than  laticeps.  The  tails  are  rarely  complete.  A  specimen, 
27  mm.  snout  to  vent,  has  a  tail  44  mm. ;  one  50  mm.,  a  tail  100  mm. ; 
one  53  mm.,  a  tail  95  mm.;  one  79,  a  tail  125  mm.  The  subcaudal 
scutes  in  two  complete  tails  were  110  and  112. 

Unfortunately,  I  have  no  data  on  the  habits  of  this  form,  nor 
can  I  state  whether  it  is  terrestrial  or  arboreal.  The  claws  are 
somewhat  more  of  the  general  character  of  laticeps,  and  distinctly 
larger  than  in  fasciatus.  The  character  of  the  subcaudals  serves  to 
separate  the  species  most  easily.  In  tails  that  have  been  completely 
regenerated  this  is  impossible,  since  in  the  regenerated  part  the 
scales  are  strongly  widened. 

Like  all  of  the  known  species  of  Eumeces,  variation  in  head  scales 
as  well  as  scale  rows  and  details  of  the  markings  must  be  antici- 
pated, at  least  to  the  extent  to  which  they  occur  in  any  other  species 
of  Eumeces,  closely  related  or  not.  Many  of  the  variations  in  the 
material  examined  have  been  pointed  out;  other  variations  occur. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  231 

Cope  (1900,  p.  637)  states:  "The  Plestiodon  vittigerum  of  Hallo- 
well  from  Michigan  belongs  to  the  middle  stage  of  this  species,  var. 
polygrammus."  As  this  seems  unreasonable  I  suspect  a  typographi- 
cal error,  and  that  the  latter  part  should  read:    "of  this  species. 

Var.  polygrammus,"  etc. 

There  follows  comments  on  a  specimen  from  Colonels  Island 
which  differs  from  quinquelineatus,  "in  having  the  five  bluish-white 
lines  on  a  black  ground  very  narrow;  the  legs  uniform  black  without 
any  stripe.  There  is  a  third  lateral  stripe  on  each  side,  between  the 
fore  and  hind  legs,  less  distinct  than  the  other,  and  a  short,  light 
-tripe  on  each  side  of  the  median  one  on  the  back  of  the  neck.  This 
is  along  the  adjacent  edges  of  the  first  and  second  row  of  scales  from 
the  median  line,  the  inner  edge  of  this  first  row  involved  in  the 
median  stripe.  The  posterior  extremity  of  the  oval  light  outline  on 
the  head  above,  instead  of  being  connected  with  the  end  of  the 
dorsal  stripe  as  its  bifurcation,  has  the  two  branches  curved  out- 
ward, as  a  quarter  circle,  and  connecting  with  the  two  supple- 
mentary short  cervical  stripes  and  not  at  all  with  the  median." 

Practically  every  character  listed  is  characteristic  of  both  inex- 
pectatus and  laticeps,  except  the  statement  that  there  is  no  stripe 
on  the  leg,  since  a  white  stripe  on  the  posterior  part  of  femur  occurs 
in  both  species.  In  regard  to  the  median  line,  I  find  that  the  "bifur- 
cating" lines  of  the  head  usually  do  not  contact  the  median  line. 
However,  in  some  specimens  they  do  {vide  Taylor  1932,  pi.  XVII, 
fig.  2.)  and  in  none  I  have  examined  do  they  agree  with  the  descrip- 
tion as  I  understand  it.  Certain  specimens  of  laticeps  sometimes 
fail  to  have  the  median  dorsal  line  touch  the  head  lines.  The  lines 
between  the  dorsolateral  line  and  the  median  line  develop  in  both 
species,  perhaps  earlier  in  inexpectatus. 

Since  the  type  of  this  species  is  apparently  lost  it  seems  impossible 
to  do  more  than  hazard  a  guess  as  to  the  identity  of  polygrammus, 
although  to  me  it  seems  more  likely  that  it  is  the  form  called 
inexpectatus  than  laticeps.  However,  were  I  to  use  the  name 
polygrammus  instead  of  inexpectatus,  it  is  obvious  that  I  would  be 
exchanging  a  certainty  for  an  uncertainty,  and  in  that  case  one 
might  just  as  well  use  the  name  quinquelineatus,  another  uncertainty 
and  an  older  one! 

Moreover,  there  is  of  course  a  possibility  that  this  is  the  form 
described  as  capito  by  Bocourt.*   I  have  not  allocated  this  name  to 

*  Eumeces  capito  Bocourt,  Mi--.  Sci.  Mexique,  I.iv.  VI,  1879,  pp.  429-431,  pi.  XXII  D, 
figs.  8,  8a,  8b,  8c. 


232 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


synonymy,  but  think  it  probable  that  it  is  based  upon  an  aberrant 
specimen  of  fasciatus. 

Distribution.  The  northern  limits  of  distribution  of  this  form 
are  as  yet  uncertain.  It  follows  the  Atlantic  and  Gulf  Coast  line 
from  Norfolk,  Va.,  to  the  Mississippi  river  mouth.  Whether  it 
reaches  any  considerable  distance  from  the  coast  in  the  seaboard 
states  is  known  only  as  obtains  in  Mississippi,  where  a  series  of 
specimens  have  been  collected  at  University  in  Lafayette  Co., 
approximately  250  miles  from  the  coast,  In  South  Carolina  it  is 
known  to  reach  York  Co.,  about  150  miles  from  the  coast.  Indiana 
records  in  the  Museum  of  Comparative  Zoology,  Harvard  College, 
must  be  regarded  as  too  doubtful  to  be  considered.  A  very  con- 
siderable part,  if  not  the  entire  range  of  this  species,  is  shared  with 
laticeps,  and,  with  the  possible  exception  of  southern  Florida,  also 
with  fasciatus. 


Fig.  32.    Distribution  of  Eumeces  inexpectatus  Taylor,  in 
Southeastern  United  States. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  233 

LOCALITY  RECORDS 

Virginia:    Norfolk  Co.:    Norfolk   (U.S.N.M.  1);  Wallaceton,  Dismal  Swamp 

(U.S.N.M.  1). 
North  Carolina: 

Craven  Co.:  Newborn  (Mich.  U.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Lenoir  Co.:   Kinston  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Dare  Co.:  Hatteras,  Hatteras  Is.  (U.S.N.M.  2). 
Cartaret  Co.:  Beaufort  schute  (M.C.Z.  2,  part  of  Nos.  3405-3407). 
South  Carolina: 

Charleston  Co.:   Charleston  (M.C.Z.  1)  (Field  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1) 

(A.N.S.P.  4). 
York  Co.:   Near  Rockhill  (Mich.  U.  1). 
Florida  : 

Alachua  Co.:    (Mich.  U.  1) ;  Gainesville  (Mich.  U.  2). 

Brevard  Co.:   Eau  Gallic  (M.C.Z.  2) ;  Georgiana  (U.S.N.M.  16) ; 

Canaveral  (A.M.N.H.  5);  Micco  (A.M.N  H.  1). 
Citrus  Co.:    (K.U.  2,  types) ;  Pineola  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
Dade  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1);  Everglade  (A.M.N.H.  1);  Homestead  (M.C.Z. 

1);   Long  Pine  Key   (M.C.Z.  1);    Miami    (M.C.Z.  3);   Lemon  City 

(U.S.N.M.  1). 
HUlsboro  Co.:   (K.U.  5)  (Mich.  U.  2). 
Lake  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1);  St.  John's  River.  Hawkinsville   (M.C.Z.  1); 

Tavares  (U.S.N.M.  2);  Lakeland  (A.M.N.H.  5). 
Lee  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1) ;  Fort  Meyers  (Mich.  U.  1) ;  Captive  Is. 

(A.M.N.H.  1). 
Manatee  Co.:  Little  Sarasota  Bay  (U.S.N.M.  3). 
Marion  Co.:   (Field  2)  (Carnegie  2) ;  Eureka  (Toledo  Z.S.  1). 
Monroe  Co.:  Key  West  (M.C.Z.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1) ;  Tortugas  (M.C.Z.  2) ; 

Pine  Key   (M.C.Z.  1);   Paradise  Key   (M.C.Z.  3);    (?)   Boca  Chica 

Key  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Nassau  Co.:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Orange  Co.:   Chuluota  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Osceola  Co.:    Kissimmee   (M.C.Z.  1);  Lake  Kissimmee   (U.S.N.M.  1); 

(?)  Kissimmee  Prairie  (A.M.N.H.  3). 
Palm  Beach  Co.:    West  Palm  Beach   (M.C.Z.  1);   Ritta   (U.S.N.M. 3); 

Lake  Worth  (U.S.N.M.  1) ;  Hobe  Sound  (A.M.N.H.  2). 
Pasco  Co.:   Argo  (A.N.S.P.  3). 
Pinelas  Co.:    Long  Key   (Mich.  U.  2);   near  Clearwater   (Mich.  U.  1); 

near  Gulfport  (Mich.  U.  2)  ;  St.  Petersburg  (Cornell  3). 
Polk  Co.:  Lake  Kissimmee  (U.S.N.M.  1 ) ;  Auburndale  (U.S.N.M.  6). 
St.  Lucie  Co.:   Sebastian  (M.C.Z.  2). 

Volusia  Co.:  Volusia  (A.N.S.P.  8) ;  New  Smyrna  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Indeterminate   localities — as  regards  county:     Lake   Okechobe    (M.C.Z. 

1);    East   Florida    (M.C.Z.    1);    Florida    (M.C.Z.   6)    (A.M.N.H.   2) 

(Carnegie  1) ;  Cabbage  Key  I  Mich.  U.  1) ;  St.  John's  River  (U.S.M.N. 

1);    South   Fla.    (U.S.N.M.    1);    Arcadia    Is.    (U.S.N.M.   1);    Central 

Fla.  (U.S.N.M.  1);  Royal  Palm  Hammock  (U.S.N.M.  1);  Oak  Lodge 

(A.M.N.H.  5). 


234  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Georgia:    (M.C.Z.  1). 

Liberty  Co.:   Riceboro  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Charlton  Co.:   Cypress  Bayou.  Floyds  Is.,  Okefenoke  Swamp  (A.M.N.H. 
2);  Okefenoke  Swamp  (Cornell  10). 
Alabama: 

Lee  Co:    (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Mobile  Co.:    Whistler  (U.S.N.M.  2);  Mobile  (M.C.Z.  1);  10  miles  west 
of  Mobile  (M.C.Z.  1). 

Greene  Co.:   Eutau  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Mississippi  : 

Lafayette  Co.:  University  (Mich.  U.  6). 

Hancock  Co.:  Bay  St.  Louis  (Mich.  U.  3)  (U.  S.  N.  M.  1). 

Harrison  Co.:   Biloxi  (Field  1)  (U.S.N.M.  3). 

Jackson  Co.:   Ocean  Springs  (Cornell  1). 
Louisiana  : 

East  Baton  Rouge   Co.:    Camp   Wilson,  Indianmound   (Field   10;   one 
number,  4831,  with  five  young  fasciatns). 

East  Carrol  Co.:   Mellville  (U.S.N.M.  3). 
?Indiaxa:     (Several  specimens  in  M.C.Z.  from  the  Blatchley  Collection  bear 

the  following  records:    Putnam   Co.,  Ind.   (M.C.Z.  2);   Knox  Co.,  Ind. 

(M.C.Z.  1):  Crawford  Co.,  Ind.  (M.C.Z.  1);  Indiana  (M.C.Z.  3).    I  am 

strongly  inclined  to  regard  these  localities  as  doubtful  until  further  ma- 
terial is  discovered  in  this  state.) 

Eumeces  tunganus  Stejneger 

(Fig.  35,  Distribution) 
SYNONYMY 

1896.    Eumeces   Xanthi   Giinther.      Ann.    Mus.    Zool.    St.    Petersbourg,    I,    1896,    p.    203    (non 

Gunther,   1889). 
1924.     Eumeces  tunganus  Stejneger.     Journ.  Washington  Acad.  Sci.,  XIV,  No.  16,  Oct.  4,  1924, 

pp.    383,    384    (type   description;    type   locality,    Tung   River   Valley   near   Luting   Kiao, 

western  Szechwan);   and  Proc.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  LXVI,  Art.  25,  1926,  pp.  51,  52;   Gee, 

Bull.  Dept.  Biol.  Yencliing  U.,  I,  1929-'30,  p.   63. 

History.  The  types  of  this  species  were  discovered  August  9, 
1923,  by  the  Rev.  D.  C.  Graham  in  the  Tung  River  valley  near 
Luting  Kiao  in  western  Szechwan.  Doctor  Stejneger  (1924)  pointed 
out  that  the  Russian  explorer  Potanin  had  obtained  specimens  in 
August,  1894,  at  Li-Fangfu  (also  in  the  Tung  River  valley),  which 
Gunther  (1896)  identified  as  Eumeces  xanthi  Gunther.  Doctor 
Stejneger  had  these  specimens  compared  with  drawings  of  the  type 
of  tunganus  by  Mr.  S.  Czarewsky,  who  pronounced  them  identical 
with  the  species  from  which  the  drawing  was  made. 

The  type  specimen  is  injured  by  a  great  gash  across  the  shoulders, 
and  the  preservative  (apparently  formalin)  has  discolored  the 
specimen  and  perhaps  obscured  certain  color  markings.  The  smaller 
paratype  is  in  good  condition,  but  is  likewise  discolored. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Ia  mixes  235 

A  second  scries  of  eleven  specimens  was  later  sent  to  the  U.  S. 
National  Museum.  These  are  U.S.N.M.  Nos.  81976-81978,  and 
82750-82757,  collected  by  Reverend  Graham  at  Lu  Ding  Chiao, 
Szechwan,  China,  altitude  5,000  ft.,  July,  1930. 

Diagnosis.  A  typical  five-lined  species  with  the  median  light 
line  bifurcating  at  the  nuchal  and  later  reuniting  on  the  snout;  a 
patch  of  irregular,  enlarged  scales  on  the  posterior  surface  of  the 
thigh;  a  keeled,  lateral  postanal  scale  is  absent.  A  postnasal 
present;  two  postmentals;  limbs  overlapping  when  adpressed;  28 
scale  rows  about  the  body;  64  scales  from  parietals  to  above  the 
anus.  The  upper  secondary  temporal  large,  the  posterior  border 
greatly  elongate,  notched  below  by  the  small,  nearly  parallel- 
sided  lower  secondary  temporal. 

Description  of  the  species  (from  the  type,  U.S.N.M.  No.  66736, 
Luting  Kiao,  western  Szechwan,  "Where  the  road  to  Tatsienlu 
crosses  the  Tung  River;"  alt.,  5-6,000  ft.;  collector,  Rev.  D.  C. 
Graham,  Aug.  9,  1923).  Snout  relatively  slender,  the  part  of  rostral 
visible  above  pointed,  the  area  much  less  than  the  frontonasal; 
supranasals  large,  forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal  six-sided, 
relatively  narrow  due  to  height  of  the  anterior  loreals  which  border 
it  laterally,  not  or  scarcely  larger  than  the  prefrontals;  latter 
pentagonal,  forming  a  median  suture,  and  sutures  with  the  frontal, 
frontonasal,  second  loreal,  first  loreal,  first  supraocular,  first  super- 
ciliary and  each  other,  the  length  of  the  sutures  in  the  order  named ; 
frontal  elongate,  obtusely  angular  at  each  end,  its  length  a  little 
greater  than  its  distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  bordered  by 
three  (two  on  left  side)  supraoculars,  broadly  separated  from  the 
frontonasal;  frontoparietals  larger  than  the  prefrontals,  their  median 
suture  greater  than  half  their  length;  interparietal  rather  small, 
elongate,  not  enclosed  by  the  parietals;  parietals  angular,  dis- 
tinctly longer  than  wide;  two  pairs  of  nuchals;  four  supraoculars; 
nasal  small,  divided  by  a  suture,  the  lower  suture  reaching  the  first 
labial;  a  postnasal  slightly  wedged  between  first  and  second  labials; 
anterior  loreal  much  higher  than  wide,  much  higher  than  posterior, 
which  is  very  much  longer  than  high;  two  presuboculars;  eight 
superciliaries,  the  anterior  large,  elongate,  the  last  relatively  very 
small  compared  with  the  typical  condition  in  the  genus;  four  post- 
suboculars;  primary  temporal  rectangular;  upper  secondary  very 
large,  the  posterior  part  curved,  greatly  elongated,  the  lower  side 
notched  by  the  small,  nearly  parallel-sided  lower  secondary  tem- 
poral; tertiary  temporal  rather  short  and  wide,  separated  from  the 


236  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

nuchal  by  another  scale  longer  but  less  wide;  first  pair  of  post- 
labials  large,  the  upper  scale  the  larger;  the  second  pair  small;  two 
or  three  tiny  serrate  auricular  lobules;  seven  upper  labials,  last 
largest,  widely  separated  from  the  upper  secondary  temporal,  the 
four  anterior  not  greatly  differing  in  height,  all  lower  than  the  sub- 
ocular;  five  or  six  lower  labials;  two  azygous  postmentals  (ab- 
normally divided  in  the  type  so  that  the  second  part  is  separated 
from  the  labials);  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  first  in  contact; 
the  postgenial  large,  bordered  on  anterior  inner  border  by  a  slender 
elongate  scale;  mental  with  a  much  larger  labial  border  than  rostral. 

Eye  small,  its  length  much  less  than  its  distance  from  the  nostril; 
most  of  the  upper  palpebral  series  contact  the  superciliaries ;  lower 
eyelid  with  three  enlarged  scutes  separated  from  the  subocular  labial 
by  two  granular  rows  of  scales;  a  tiny  preocular;  two  small  post- 
oculars;  ear  surrounded  by  about  twenty  or  twenty-one  scales. 

The  median  dorsal  scale  rows  widened  anteriorly,  not  or  only 
slightly  widened  in  the  middle  of  back;  scales  around  neck  behind 
ear,  40;  about  narrow  part  of  neck,  34  rows;  38  rows  in  axillary 
region;  26  about  middle  of  body;  21  about  base  of  tail;  space  of  three 
subcaudals  occupied  by  four  or  five  series  of  small  scales  following 
anus;  subcaudals  distinctly  widened,  about  four  times  as  wide  as 
long;  tail  regenerated  posteriorly;  eight  preanal  scales,  the  two 
median  greatly  enlarged,  the  outer  scales  overlapping  the  inner, 
their  posterior  edges  forming  a  curve;  the  lateral  postanal  scale  in 
males  lacking  any  noticeable  keel. 

Limbs  strong,  elongate,  overlapping  a  length  of  about  18  scales 
when  adpressed;  seventeen  scales  about  insertion  of  the  forelimb; 
palm  with  two  (or  three)  outer  wrist  tubercles,  the  inner  of  the  two 
largest;  palm  with  five  or  six  enlarged  padlike  tubercles  irregularly 
disposed,  all  contiguous;  other  tubercles  small;  lamellar  formula  of 
fingers:  6;  10;  12;  13;  6;  no  laterally  intercalated  series  of  scutes; 
terminal  lamellae  not  bound  tightly  about  toes;  claws  narrow, 
elongate;  18  scales  in  series  about  the  insertion  of  the  hind  limb; 
on  posterior  surface  of  thigh  a  well-defined,  irregular  series  of  en- 
larged scales;  lamellar  formula  of  toes:  7;  9;  16;  17;  11. 

Color  and  markings  (preserved  in  formalin).  Above  dark  black- 
ish-brown with  five  distinctly  outlined  light  stripes.  The  median 
bifurcates  on  the  nuchal  or  interparietal  and  its  branches  run  for- 
ward to  unite  on  rostral;  behind  it  is  visible  a  short  distance  on 
tail;  the  dorsolateral  lines  begin  on  the  first  superciliary,  pass  along 
sides  of  head  to  the  third  scale  row,   continuing  back  along  this 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumei  i  s 


237 


c 
c 


r. 


I 
v. 

- 

CO 


3 


CN 

CN 

f^  tc 

^ 

w 

M 

c 

c 

00 

oc 

i- 

CO 

00 

« 

i-l 

CN 

CO 

•— 

Ol 

£o 

t«3 

p 

IN 

U5 

"^  M 

oc 

■* 

iO 

(M 

c 

o: 

OS 

<N 

C>4 

OC 

co 

00 

u; 

c- 

1- < 

C-4 

CN 

»H 

OJ 

sbSi 

*s 

p 

c^ 

^  IT5 

00 

U5 

C-l 

OS 

c 

OC 

t^ 

co 

00' 

55 

l-l 

— 

CO 

•H 

CN 

Zn 

CO  eo 

p 

p; 

co 

cn 

CO 

iO 

CO 

o 

^00 

_ 

i- 

c-i 

Q 

O) 

c 

t^ 

CO 

oo 

■x 

~1 

CO 

— 

— 

— 

OJ. 

Zao 

=»ss 

~ 

<N 

•o 

s* 

W 

w 

■* 

co 

a 

_ 

C) 

OC 

CO 

oo 

<e 

iH 

CS 

CN 

— 

CN 

£g^ 

«s 

& 

CN 

X 

* 

s~ 

c 

-# 

co 

CO 

■* 

-? 

c 

oc 

o 

t^ 

— 

~^ 

CN 

■fl- 

1— 

O) 

CN 

^H 

CO  oo 

P 

co 

sV 

co 

t^ 

I- 

■* 

OC 

CI 

i0 

c< 

1- 

OC 

o 

1^ 

CN 

p; 

D 

cs 

rH 

fc»t 

03  3 

p 

CN 

CD 

■ 

T— 

0C 

a 

tC 

lit 

•x 

1-0 

r- 

oc 

c 

f^CO 

0C 

T— 

CN 

Tf 

CS 

PI 

T— 

SiS* 

> 

«IS 

p 

b 

c 
s 

> 

t- 

T 

i. 
c 

z 

I 

1 

s 

e 

a 

> 

c 

a 

c: 

b 

1    — 

£■ 

o 

='  c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

"e 

<*- 

b 

b 

[     « 

1     n 

IS 

-  - 

4- 

-*- 

— 

a 

-f 

C 

"" 

V 

0. 

a 

1 

S 

I 

I       a 

_ 

\ 

V. 

= 
c 
c 
a 

s 
c 
c 
a 

— 
•  - 

< 

& 

h 
c 

a 

c     * 

I 

i 

1 

1 

o 
.5 
IS 

U 

to 
c 


r 


— 

CD 


238  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

row  occupying  medially  a  little  more  than  the  half  of  the  width  of 
the  scales,  visible  some  distance  farther  on  the  tail  than  the  median 
line;  lateral  line  begins  apparently  on  the  rostral,  follows  the  lower 
part  of  labial  series  back  to  eye,  then  rises,  passing  diagonally 
above  the  ear  and  continues  back  to  insertion  of  the  hind  leg;  the 
region  both  in  front  of  and  posterior  to  ear  light  but  not  the  shade 
of  the  light  color  of  the  lateral  stripe;  head  a  lighter  shade  than 
back;  a  differentiated  darker  stripe  between  the  dorsolateral  and 
lateral  light  lines;  chin,  throat,  underside  of  limbs,  anal  region,  and 
underside  of  tail  light  cream.  Tail  lighter  brown.  (A  dark  line 
present  below  the  lateral  light  line.) 

Variation.  It  is  with  the  greatest  reluctancy  that  I  have  placed 
under  this  species,  the  paratype  U.S.N.M.  No.  66737,  U.S.N.M.  Nos. 
82751-55  and  U.S.N.M.  Nos.  81976-78,  owing  to  the  fact  that  all 
show  a  completely  different  color  pattern  from  the  type.  Doctor 
Stejneger  has  pointed  out  to  me  that  the  preserving  fluid  may  have 
been  responsible  for  the  loss  of  the  typical  marking.  However,  it 
appears  to  me  that  the  type  itself  was  preserved  in  the  same  fluid 
as  the  cotype. 

These  specimens  lack  the  typical  ''quinquelineatus"  pattern  which 
is  typical  in  every  way  in  the  type;  not  only  is  it  wanting  in  the 
adults,  as  might  be.  expected,  but  likewise  in  the  very  young  ones 
as  well.  There  is  no  trace  of  bifurcating  lines  on  the  head.  The 
general  color  is  apparently  gray-olive  (in  life;  now  somewhat 
darkened)  with  three  indefinitely-edged,  lighter  olive  lines  bounded 
by  slightly  darker  stripes,  likewise  indefinitely-edged.  There  is 
also  a  suggestion  of  a  lateral  darker  stripe.  Another  specimen, 
No.  82754,  is  uniformly  dark  olive  above,  slightly  darker  on  the 
sides;  head  buffy.  No.  82752,  head  discolored  buff;  tail  lighter 
than  back;  a  suggestion  of  a  median  line  on  the  neck;  chin,  labials, 
and  an  area  before  and  behind  the  ear  light. 

An  examination  of  the  scales,  however,  shows  a  strict  conformity 
to  the  type  pattern.  The  temporal  pattern,  with  the  peculiar  notch 
in  the  upper  secondary  temporal,  is  identical,  as  are  the  general  re- 
lations of  the  head  scales.  The  body  scales  exhibit  only  the  nor- 
mally expected  amount  of  variation.  Thus,  the  scales  in  a  row  from 
parietal  to  above  anus  vary  between  63-71,  66  being  the  most 
frequent  number;  scales  about  the  neck,  32  to  36;  about  middle 
of  body,  26-28,  the  former  number  being  the  most  frequent.  There 
is  one  pair  of  nuchals,  but  in  three  specimens  there  is  an  extra 
nuchal  on  one  side  or  the  other;  superciliaries  vary  from  6-8,  the 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  239 

higher  numbers  being  most  frequent;  subdigital  lamellae  of  the 
fourth  too  vary  from  16-20,  the  number  18  being  most  frequent. 
When  adpressed  the  limbs  in  all  cases  overlap,  a  greater  propor- 
tional distance  in  the  young.     This  varies  from  6-16  scale  lengths 

L'i  marks.  It  is  conceivable  that  two  species  having  such  similar 
scale  patterns  might  occupy  the  same  general  region  and  yet  not 
interbreed.  The  number  of  specimens  available  at  present  of  these 
Szechwan  forms  is  so  small,  that,  lacking  data  on  habits  and 
habitats,  it  seems  wiser  to  leave  this  association  as  it  now  is,  for 
the  present  if  not  for  all  time. 

Distribution.  The  records  available  show  western  Szechwan  as 
the  only  known  habitat,  with  the  following  localities:  Tung  River 
valley  near  Luting  Kiao,  5.000-6,000  ft.  alt.;  type  locality  (U.S.N.M. 
2  I  :  Lu  Ding  Chiao  (this  may  be  a  different  spelling  of  the  foregoing 
name)  (U.S.N.M.  11);  Lifang  fu  (Gunther,  1896);  Valley  of  the 
Tung  river  (Gunther,  1896).     (See  Fig.  35  for  distributional  map.) 

Eumeces  xanthi  Gunther 

(Plate  17;    Figs.  33,  35) 
SYNONYMY 

1889.  Eumeces  xanthi  Gunther.  Ann.  Mag.  Nat.  Hist.,  (6),  1889,  p.  218  (type  description; 
type  locality,  Ichang,  Hupeh,  China;  Pratt,  collector;  four  specimens);  Boulenger, 
Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1890,  p.  80  (type  referred  to)  ;  Werner,  Abh.  K.  Bayer 
Akad.  Wiss.,  II,  kl.  XXII,  B.,  2,  II  Abt.,  1903,  pp.  343-384  ("Hupe,  Szetschwan") ; 
Mell,  Lingnan  Sci.  Journ.,  1930,  p.  225  (mentioned,  as  of  west  China) ;  Stejneger, 
Journ.  Wash.  Acad.  Sci.,  XIV,  1924.  pp.  383-384  (discussion  in  relation  to  Szechwan 
skinks). 

1924.  Eumeces  pekinensis  Stejneger.  Occ.  Papers  Boston  Nat.  Hist.  Soc,  V,  July  21,  1924, 
p.  120  (type  description;  type.  U.S.N.M.  No.  60863;  H-:n-Lung-Shan  district, 
Imperial  Hunting  Grounds,  Chihli  Province,  665  mi.  NE  of  Peking,  China;  A.  de  C. 
Sowerby);  and  Proc.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  LXVI,  Art.  25,  1926,  pp.  49-51,  fig.  2  (three 
line  drawings  of  head);  Schmidt,  Bull.  Amer.  Mus.  Nat,  Hist.,  LIV,  Art.  4,  1927, 
pp.  502,  503;  ?  Mell,  Lingnan  Sci.  Journ.,  1930,  p.  225  (discussion  of  distribution); 
Tchang,  Bull.  Fan  Mem.  Inst.  Biol.,  Ill,  1931,  pp.  275-276  (short  description;  speci- 
mens from  Peiping);  Boring,  Liu  Cheng-Chao,  Shu-Ch'un  Chow,  Handb.  N.  China 
Ainph.  Rept.,  Handb.  3.  Peiping  Nat.  Hist.  Bull.,  1932,  p.  58,  fig.:  Pavlov,  Pub.  do 
Mus.  Hoangho  Pai  ho,  No.  12,  1932,  p.  8  (lists  specimens  from  localities  in  "Tchewli" 
and  Mongolia). 

History.  This  species  was  di-covered  at  Ichang  by  Mr.  Pratt, 
who  sent  specimens  to  the  British  Museum.  These  were  described 
under  the  name  Eumeces  xanthi.  The  description,  while  accurate 
so  far  as  it  goes,  leaves  unmentioned  three  characters  of  importance: 
the  characters  of  the  temporal  scales  and  the  presence  or  absence  of 
specialized  postfemoral  and  lateral  postanal  scutes.  Moreover,  the 
character  of  the  median  dorsal  scales  was  unduly  emphasized,  and 
the  relationship  was  stated  to  be  with  Eumeces  skiltonianus. 

It  is  small  wonder  that  Stejneger,  on  receipt  of  specimens  collected 


240  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

by  A.  de  C.  Sowerby  from  a  northern  province,  should  regard  them 
undescribed.  His  presumed  new  form  was  named  pekinensis,  the 
holotype  being  U.S.N.M.  No.  60863,  with  two  paratypes,  Nos.  60864 
and  60865.  The  type  description,  a  very  brief  diagnosis  published 
in  1924,  was  supplemented  in  1926  by  a  very  complete  description 
and  figures  depicting  the  squamation  of  the  head  scales  from  three 
views.    He  compares  the  species  with  latiscutatus  and  elegans. 

Clifford  Pope,  at  a  somewhat  later  time,  obtained  a  series  of 
twelve  specimens  at  a  point  13  miles  north  of  Hsien-Lung  Shan, 
Eastern  Toombs,  Chihli,  which  were  sent  to  the  American  Museum 
of  Natural  History,  New  York.  Schmidt  (1927)  reported  on  this 
series  and  published  Pope's  field  notes  on  the  habits  of  the  form. 

In  the  beginning  of  my  study  of  these  forms,  Mr.  H.  W.  Parker 
of  the  British  Museum  was  kind  enough  to  prepare  photographs  of 
the  type  specimens  of  Giinther's  xanthi.  An  examination  of  these 
photographs  indicated  that  this  species  and  pekinensis  are  closely 
related.  The  photo  was  later  compared  with  the  type  of  pekinensis, 
and  my  suspicion  that  the  two  species  are  the  same  was  confirmed. 
At  a  somewhat  later  date  I  had  the  privilege  of  examining  two 
of  the  types  then  at  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History, 
due  to  the  characteristic  kindness  of  Mr.  Clifford  Pope.  He  like- 
wise had  independently  concluded  that  pekinensis  and  xanthi  are 
synonyms. 

Stejneger  has  already  pointed  out  the  possibility  that  the  speci- 
mens of  xanthi  reported  from  Li  Fang-Fu,  Szechwan,  may  very 
probably  belong  to  his  recently  described  species  Eumeces  tunganus, 
though  I  believe  this  is  based  upon  probability  only.  It  likewise 
appears  probable  that  the  Szechwan  specimens  reported  by  Werner 
(1903)  may  likewise  be  referable  to  tunganus. 

Diagnosis.  A  medium  sized  species,  characterized  by  typical 
dorsolateral  and  lateral  white  lines,  and  a  median  line  bifurcating 
on  the  nuchal  and  joining  again  on  the  snout;  the  median  line  as 
well  as  the  others  tends  to  become  obsolete  in  old  specimens.  One 
postnasal;  two  postmentals;  primary  temporal  large,  in  contact 
with  the  larger  fan-shaped  lower  secondary  temporal;  scale  rows 
22-24  (rarely  26);  nuchals  two  pairs;  seven  upper  labials;  limbs 
overlap  when  adpressed  except  in  very  large  specimens;  a  group 
of  enlarged,  differentiated  postfemoral  scales  and  a  differentiated 
lateral  postanal;  subcaudals  widened. 

Descnption  of  the  species.  Portion  of  the  rostral  visible  above 
triangular,  with  an  area  more  than  half  as  large  as  frontonasal; 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  241 

supranasals  relatively  large,  as  large  as  or  slightly  larger  than  the 

prefrontals,  more  than  double  the  size  of  the  nasals,  forming  a 
strong  median  suture;  frontonasal  broader  than  long,  forming  a 
relatively  broad  suture  with  the  frontal,  the  sutures  with  the  nasals 
largest,  touching  the  anterior  loreal  laterally;  frontal  longer  than 
its  distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  narrowly  truncate  anteriorly, 
rounded  posteriorly,  touching  three  supraoculars,  wider  anteriorly 
than  posteriorly;  frontoparietals  not  noticeably  larger  than  the 
prefrontals,  more  elongate,  forming  a  median  suture;  interparietal 
with  an  acute  anterior  angle,  somewhat  rounded  behind;  parietals 
broad,  relatively  short,  truncate  posteriorly,  not  enclosing  the  inter- 
parietal; two  pairs  of  nuchals  (two-three  in  one  specimen). 

Xasal  completely  divided,  low,  elongate,  the  nostril  almost  di- 
rectly above  point  where  the  rostrolabial  suture  reaches  the  mouth; 
postnasal  large;  anterior  loreal  much  higher  than  wide,  higher  than 
the  posterior;  anterior  part  much  higher  than  posterior  part  of  the 
second  loreal.  the  scale  longer  than  high  (vertically  broken  in  one 
specimen);  four  supraoculars;  seven  superciliaries  (normally),  the 
anterior  very  much  larger  than  the  last,  which  is  fan-shaped  and 
not  greatly  higher  than  wide;  a  tiny  preocular  and  two  small 
postoculars;  presuboculars  two;  postsuboculars  five;  upper  palpe- 
bral scales  not  wholly  separated  by  intercalated  granules,  at  least 
three  or  four  touching  the  superciliaries;  usually  four  enlarged  scales 
on  the  lower  eyelid,  separated  from  the  subocular  by  three  rows  of 
M'ales;  primary  temporal  large  (approaching  the  size  of  the  sixth 
labial  in  one  specimen),  touching  lower  secondary  temporal;  latter 
fan-shaped,  larger  than  primary  temporal;  upper  secondary  large, 
its  upper  and  lower  sides  parallel  for  more  than  half  its  length;  two 
tertiary  temporals,  the  upper  largest;  two  superimposed  postlabials, 
followed  by  three  very  tiny  scales;  two  low  lobules  on  the  edge  of 
ear;  21  or  22  scales  about  ear  opening;  seven  upper  labials,  the  first 
not  larger  than  others  of  the  four  preceding  the  subocular;  seventh 
labial  largest;  lower  labials  six. 

Mental  large,  with  a  much  larger  labial  border  than  the  rostral; 
two  postmentals;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  anterior  pair  nar- 
rowest, in  contact;  postgenial  very  large,  bordered  anteriorly  by  a 
small  narrow  scale  much  longer  than  wide;  scales  about  the  neck 
posterior  to  ear,  32;  about  constricted  portion  of  neck,  30;  in 
axillary  region,  40;  about  body,  24  (26  in  one)  ;  about  base  of  tail, 
20;  scale  rows  generally  parallel,  but  forming  somewhat  irregular 
lines  on  the  sides;  the  median  scale  rows  rather  distinctly  but  not 

16 — 1123 


242 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


greatly  widened,  except  on  neek;  59  to  60  scales  from  parietals  to 
a  point  above  vent;  eight  scales  bordering  anterior  edge  of  vent, 
the  two  median  greatly  enlarged,  the  three  laterals  diminishing  in 
size  toward  the  outer  edge,  the  outer  scales  overlapping  the  inner; 
99  subcaudals,  the  two  nearest  anus  broken  into  smaller  scales;  legs 
moderately  large,  overlapping  length  of  three  or  four  scales  when 
adpressed;  about  15  scale  rows  about  insertion  of  foreleg;  outer 
wrist  tubercle  well  developed,  with  the  adjoining  scale  modified;  a 
second  padlike  tubercle  on  palm  below  base  of  first  digit;  seven 
enlarged  tubercles  on  the  palm;  lamellar  formula:  6;  10;  12;  12; 
8;  lamellae  not  compressed  or  keeled  below;   18  scales  about  in- 


Fig.  33.  Eumeces  xanthi  Gunther.  Field  Mus.  Xo.  7396;  Hsien-Lung- 
Shan  district,  Chihli,  China.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.     Actual  head  length.  10  nun.;  width,  8  mm. 

sertion  of  hind  leg;  a  group  of  greatly  enlarged  scales  on  lower 
posterior  edge  of  femur,  the  scales  not  following  the  regular  series; 
scales  on  heel  enlarged,  separated  by  two  granules;  two  enlarged 
tubercles  on  inner  side  of  foot  greatly  differentiated  from  all  other 
granules  on  the  foot,  which  are  subequal  and  not  imbricated  on  the 
outer  part  of  foot.    Lamellar  formula  of  toes:    6;  11;  14;  17;  11. 

Claws  on  the  toes  distinctly  smaller  than  those  on  the  fingers; 
the  lateral  postanal  scale  modified,  with  a  low  but  usually  dis- 
cernible keel. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  Dorsal  ground  color  grayish,  flecked  with 
brown;  a  median  bluish-gray  (in  young,  whitish)  stripe,  bifurcating 
on  the  nuchal,  runs  forward  to  the  rostral,  covering  the  inner  third 
of  the  two  median  scale  rows;  a  pair  of  dorsolateral  lines,  originat- 


Taylor:    Tin:  (Ikxus  Eumeces 


243 


ing  oe  anterior  superciliary,  continues  hack  passing  through   the 

middle  of  the  third  scale  row,  occupying  at  least  one  half  of  each 
-rale;  median  line  clearly  edged  with  dark  brown,  the  dorsolateral 
line  dimly  edged  with  brown  above.  A  broad,  brown,  lateral  stripe 
covers  a  width  equivalent  to  two  scale  rows.  The  labials  are  all 
rather  light,  hut  a  more  distinct  whitish  or  bluish  white  line  begins 
below  anterior  part  of  eye,  passes  across  the  upper  part  of  the  last 
labials  to  upper  part  of  ear,  then  continues  behind  the  ear,  passing 
three  scale  rows  above  insertion  of  forearm  along  the  side;  it  is 
broken  by  the  insertion  of  the  hind  leg,  then  continues  some 
distance  on  the  sides  of  the  tail;  this  lateral  line  borders  the  lateral 
brown  stripe  and  is  bordered  below  by  an  indefinite  brown  stripe. 
The  lower  sides  and  abdomen  are  bluish  to  bluish-gray;  throat  and 
breast,  underside  of  limbs  and  tail  and  preanal  scales,  cream. 
Usually  a  small  brown  area  is  present  on  the  labials  in  front  of  the 
ear. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  xanthi  Giinther 


Museum 

Xumber 

B.M.N.H. 
Cotype 

B.M.N.H. 
Cotype 

1    s  N.M. 
60865 

U.S.N.M. 
60864 

U.S.N.M. 
60863 

Snout  to  vent 

76 

72 

62 

59 

54 

Tail 

132 
6.3 

reg. 
6 

Snout  to  eye 

5.1 

5 

5 

Snout  to  ear 

I.'.    1 

14 

12 

11.7 

11.5 

Snout  to  foreleg 

25 

22 

22 

20 

19.5 

Axilla  to  groin 

41 

40 

32 

30 

21 

Foreleg 

22 

20 

17.5 

16 

16 

Hind  leg 

29 

27  3 

22  4 

•>9 

20  2 

Width  of  head ' 

11 

10.3 

9 

9 

8 

Length  of  head 

14 

1 2   .". 

10.5 

10.2 

9 

Width  or  bo:lv 

14 

14 

8 

10 

10 

Longest  toe 

10.4 

10 

7.5 

7.5 

7 . 5 

Cotypes,   Hupeh,   Irhang;    U.S.N.M.    Nos.    r,ost;3 -608G5,   Hsien-Lung-Shan   District,   Chihli 
Prov.,  China. 


Variation.  Stejneger  (1926)  has  noted  in  the  paratypes  a  some- 
what smaller  frontonasal  and  states  that  the  enlarged  postfemoral 
scales  are  more  localized  as  '"patches,"  and  smaller  in  the  paratypes 
than  in  the  type.  The  following  variations  are  evident  in  northern 
'" [><  Linensis"  specimens:  Scale  rows  about  middle  of  body  22  to  24, 
the  number  22  occurring  seven  times,  23  two  times  and  24  once. 
The  number  of  scale  rows  from  occiput  to  above  anus  54  to  58,  5(i 


244  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

being  the  most  common  number.  The  labial  number  is  seven  (one 
shows  only  six),  the  last  constantly  largest;  superciliaries  vary  from 
six  to  eight ;  lamellae  under  fourth  toe  from  14  to  16.  The  relation 
of  the  supraoculars  to  the  frontal  is  generally  constant  (in  one  case 
only  is  the  third  separated  slightly  from  the  frontal). 

Older  specimens  tend  toward  a  loss  of  the  light  lines.  These  are 
very  strongly  defined,  and  strongly  contrasted  with  the  black  or 
black-brown  ground  color,  in  the  young.  In  young  adult  specimens 
the  ground  color  becomes  more  brownish  and  in  some  males  the 
ground  color  is  greenish-olive  instead  of  black  or  brown,  and  the 
head  is  olive-brown. 

The  species  is  relatively  small,  the  largest  specimen  being  79 
millimeters,  snout  to  vent;  the  tail  is  130  millimeters;  snout  to  fore- 
leg, 25;  foreleg,  16;  hind  leg,  23.  The  snout  to  foreleg  distance 
averages  34  percent  of  the  body  length;  the  hind  leg,  34  percent; 
the  tail  length  averages  60  percent  of  the  total  length.  The  axilla 
to  groin  measurement  is  approximately  50  percent  of  the  body 
length;  the  limbs  in  larger  specimens  overlap  or  are  very  narrowly 
separated  when  adpressed  to  body. 

Remarks.  The  northern  form  "pekinensis"  differs  from  the  south- 
ern xanthi  in  slightly  different  scale  averages,  which  will  doubtless 
disappear  with  larger  series  of  the  southern  specimens.  Thus, 
usually  three  out  of  four  specimens  of  xanthi  have  24  scale  rows, 
while  one  shows  26  rows ;  in  pekinensis  the  usual  number  is  22  rows, 
23  and  24  rows  also  occurring.  This  variation  is  no  greater  than 
occurs  in  many  other  species  of  Eumeces;  the  number  of  scales 
from  parietals  to  above  anus  is  59  to  60  in  xanthi  and  from  56  to 
59  in  pekinensis;  the  lamellae  under  the  fourth  toe  in  xanthi  are 
16  to  17,  in  pekinensis  14  to  17. 

Giinther  seemed  to  emphasize  the  size  of  the  median  body  scales. 
The  northern  pekinensis,  when  compared  with  the  xanthi  types, 
shows  that  in  certain  specimens  there  is  no  difference  or  only  a  slight 
apparent  difference  in  the  size  of  these  scales  in  the  two  forms,  while 
in  others  they  are  somewhat  smaller.  The  color  patterns,  when  speci- 
mens of  equal  age  and  sex  are  compared,  show  no  differences. 

Eumeces  xanthi  agrees  with  elegans  in  having  enlarged  post- 
femoral  scales,  the  postnasal  and  the  less  specialized  granular  scales 
on  the  feet,  but  E.  elegans  has  only  one  postmental,  one  pair  of 
nuchals,  more  numerous  scales  under  the  fourth  toe,  and  temporals 
like  E.  latiscutatus.  E.  xanthi  agrees  with  chinensis  in  having  two 
postmentals  and  in  temporal  scalation,  but  it  has  a  postnasal,  en- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Fa  mixes  245 

larged  postfemorals  and  lacks  the  specialized  foot  scales;  from  K. 

hit  is, -id  at  us  it  differs  in  having  the  double  postmental,  the  longer 
snout,  fewer  scale  rows  and  very  different  temporals. 

Pope,  quoted  by  Schmidt  (1927,  pp.  502-503),  states  that  the  eggs 
of  the  species  are  deposited  in  burrows  under  rocks.  The  burrows 
are  twelve  inches  in  length,  two  inches  wide  and  less  than  an  inch 
in  depth;  the  number  of  eggs  varies  from  four  to  eight.  The  female 
remains  with  the  eggs,  and  from  the  number  of  nests  found  in  one 
small  locality  it  appears  that  the  breeding  females  assemble  in 
colonics.     The  eggs  were  being  deposited  August  1-4. 

Distribution.  If  one  disregards  Giinther's  (1896)  record  of  this 
species  at  Li-Fang-Fu  Valley  of  the  Tung  river,  Szechwan,  and  that 
of  Werner  (1903)  for  Szechwan  (which  are  quite  likely  records  of 
Eumeces  tunganus  Stejnegcr),  this  species  is  only  known  with  cer- 
tainty from  the  provinces  of  Hupeh,  Chihli  and  Mongolia.  One 
may  surmise  that  it  must  also  occur  in  Honan.  Stejneger  (1926) 
has  suggested  that  specimens  collected  by  Elpatjewsky  and  Sabane- 
jew  on  the  Ussuri  coast  at  Olga  and  Vladimir  Bays  may  belong 
to  this  species  (pekinensis)  rather  than  to  marginatus  or  latis- 
cutatus,  as  they  were  identified  by  Nikolski  (1915).  Should  Stej- 
neger be  correct  in  his  surmise,  the  range  would  be  extended  a  con- 
siderable distance  to  the  northeast.  (See  Fig.  35  for  distributional 
map.) 

Locality  records: 

China:    Hupeh:    Ichang,  in  the  valley  of  the  Yangtze-Kiang  river   (types, 
British  Mus.  4;  Pratt  Coll.)   (Werner,  1903,  "Hupe,"  9). 

Chihli:  Imperial  Hunting  Grounds,  Hsien-Lung-Shan  District  (U.S.N. M. 
3,  types  of  pekinensis;  Sowerby  Coll.);  13  miles  north  Hsien-Lung- 
Shan,  Eastern  Toombs  (Field  3)  (M.CZ.  1)  (A.M.N.H.  8);  Peiping 
(M.C.Z.  1)  (Tchang,  1931,  1);  Pait'a  (Pavlov,  1932);  Paiho  (Pavlov, 
1932);  Hei  lung  tans  (Pavlov,  1932);  Nanjeli,  Western  Chihli  (Pav- 
lov, 1932). 
Mongolia:   "Siao  wan  wan  kiow"  (Pavlov,  1932). 

Eumeces  elegans  Boulenger 

(Plate  18;   Figs.  34,  35) 
SYNONYMY 

1863.  Mabouia  chinensis  Gray.  Ann.  Mag.  Nat.  Hist.,  (3),  XII,  1863,  p.  225  (Tamsui, 
Formosa);  Giinther,  Rept.  Brit.  India,  1864,  p.  83  (part.),  pi.  X,  fig.  f  (elegans) 
(Ningpo,  China;   non  Gray,  1838). 

1879.  Eumeces  pulchra  Bocourt.  Miss.  Sci.  Mex.,  Zool.,  Rept.,  Liv.  6.  p.  423  (Non  Dumeril 
and  Bibron). 

1887.  Eumeces  elegans  Boulenger.  Cat.  Lizards  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  pp.  271,  272  (type 
description;  type  not  designated;  Shanghai,  Ningpo,  Formosa,  Pescadore  Is.,  Ku  Kiang 
Mis.);    and    Proc.    Zool.    Soc.    Lond.,    1899,    p.    162    (Fukien) ;    Boettger,    Offenb.    Ver. 


246  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Naturk.,  24-25  Ber.,  1885,  p.  144;  Boettger,  Cat.  Rept.  Samml.  Mus.  Senckenb.  Nat. 
Ges.,  Teil  I,  1893.  p.  Ill  (Ningpo) ;  and  Ber.  iiber  Senckenb.  Nat.  Ges.  Frankfort, 
1894,  p.  146  (Ningpo);  Stejneger,  Jour.  Sci.  Coll.  Imp.  Uni.  Tokyo,  XII,  1898,  pi. 
III.  p.  22(1  (Taipa,  Formosa;  Pescadores);  Werner,  Abh.  K.  Bayer.  Akad.  Wiss.,  II, 
Kl.  XXII,  Bd.  II,  Abt.,  1903,  pp.  169,  203,  372;  Ste.ineg.T,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus., 
58,  1907,  pp.  202-205,  figs.  182,  183  (Taipa,  Formosa,  Pescadores);  and  Proc.  U.  S. 
Nat.  Mus.,  XXXVTII,  1910,  p.  99;  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  III, 
1908-1913,  (1912),  pp.  223-225  (China,  Pescadores,  Formosa;  description  with  notes 
on  variation);  Stanley,  Jour.  N.  China  Asiat.  Soc,  XIV,  1914,  p.  25;  Vogt,  Sitz. 
Ber.  Ges.  Naturf.  Freunde  Berlin,  1914,  p.  100  (Canton);  Vogt,  Arch,  fur  Natur., 
88  Jahr,  1922,  Abt.  A.,  Heft  10,  pp.  135-146;  Mell,  Arch,  fur  Naturg.,  88  Jahr,  1922, 
Abt.  A.,  Heft  10,  p.  114;  Stejneger.  Proc.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  LXVI,  1925,  p.  45; 
Schmidt,  Bull.  Arner.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  LIV,  1927,  p.  505  (numerous  localities);  Pope, 
Bull.  Amer.  Mus.,  LVIII,  1927,  pp.  386-388,  Fig.  2b  (numerous  localities,  with  notes 
on  variation);  Wu,  Sci.  Reps.  Nat.  Cent.  Univ.'  Nanking,  Ser.  B.,  I,  No.  7,  1930, 
p.  53;  Gee,  Bull.  Dept.  Biol.  Yenching  Uni.,  I,  No.  1.  1930,  pp.  53-84;  Tchang, 
Bull.  Fan  Mem.  Inst.  Biol.,  II,  1931,  p.  276  (Nanking);  Chang,  Cont.  Biol.  Lab.  Sci. 
Soc.  China,  VIII,  Zool.  Ser.  2,  1932.  p.  18,  fig.  4  (description  of  specimens  from 
Szechwan);   Boring,  First  Ann.  Rep.   M.  B.  A.  G,  1932.  p.   112   (locality  records). 

1912.  Eumeces  xanthi  Barbour.  Mem.  Mus.  Comp.  Zool.,  XL,  1912,  p.  134  (Ichang)  (not 
of  Giinther,   1889). 

1926.     Plestiodon  elegans  Sun.      Cont.   Biol.   Lab.   Sci.   Soc.  China,   Vol.   II,  No.   2,   1926,  p.   5. 

History.  The  brevity  of  Gray's  early  description  (1838)  of  a 
Chinese  skink  under  the  name  of  Tiliqua  chinensis  seems  to  have 
been  responsible  for  certain  subsequent  writers  referring  all  Chinese 
specimens  of  the  genus  to  Gray's  species.  Thus,  Swinhoe  (3863), 
Giinther  (1864),  and  perhaps  others  confused  the  species  under 
discussion  with  chinensis.  Apparently,  it  was  not  recognized  until 
1887,  when  Boulenger  described  it  from  specimens  from  China, 
Formosa,  and  the  Pescadores  Islands.  He  failed  to  designate  a  type 
or  type  locality.  After  this  time  the  name  appeared  in  literature, 
with  reports  of  specimens  from  various  localities.  Stejneger  (1907) 
gives  a  very  good  description  of  a  Formosa  specimen  and  discusses 
the  relationships  of  the  species,  concluding  that  the  form  is  more 
closely  related  to  latiscutatus  than  to  marginatum.  Van  Denburgh 
(1912)  gives  an  excellent  summation  of  the  variations  in  the  Chinese 
specimens,  and  in  those  from  Formosa  and  the  Pescadores,  present- 
ing the  data  in  tabulated  form.  Stejneger  (1926)  points  out  that 
Barbour  (1912)  has  mistaken  a  young  specimen  of  elegans  from 
Ichang  for  Giinther's  xanthi  from  the  same  locality. 

Schmidt  (1927)  and  Pope  (1929)  discussed  the  Chinese  specimens 
in  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  the  greater  part  of 
which  were  collected  by  Pope.  This  series  is  very  extensive,  com- 
prising 198  specimens  of  all  ages. 

Diagnosis.  A  typical  five-lined  species  of  large  size,  the  median 
light  line  bifurcating  on  the  nuchal;  dorsolateral  line  from  the  pre- 
frontal extending  more  than  two  thirds  the  length  of  tail;  the 
lateral  line  begins  as  a  series  of  labial  dots  more  or  less  connected, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  247 

pacing  through  the  car,  involving  all  except  lower  part;  no  sub- 
lateral  line;  brown  lateral  stripe  distinct;  a  large  patch  of  irregular 
scutes  on  postfemoral  region;  a  keeled  lateral  postanal  scute;  post- 
nasal absent;  a  single  postmental;  series  of  scutes  following  the 
emarginate,  fan-shaped  upper  secondary  temporal  well  differenti- 
ated in  males;  lower  secondary  temporal  with  sides  nearly  parallel; 
scales  in  26-28  rows. 

Descriptioji  of  species  (from  Chinese  specimens).  A  consider- 
able portion  of  the  rostral  visible  from  above;  supranasals  moder- 
ately large,  not  or  rarely  approaching  the  size  of  the  prefrontals; 
frontonasal  usually  large,  usually  in  contact  with  the  loreals  (rarely 
not)  and  usually  in  contact  with  the  frontal  (frequently  not)  ; 
prefrontals  variable  in  size,  apparently  never  as  large  as  the 
frontoparietals,  in  contact  with  both  loreals,  their  longest  suture 
with  the  frontonasal.  Frontal  moderate,  much  longer  than  its 
distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  usually  only  slightly  widened 
anteriorly,  the  sides  converging  slightly  posteriorly,  in  contact  with 
three  supraoculars;  frontoparietals  longer  than  wide,  occasionally 
as  wide  as  long,  forming  a  median  suture  equal  to  half  their  length; 
interparietal  usually  less  in  area  than  the  frontoparietals,  narrowed 
posteriorly,  and  usually  rounded  behind,  always  in  contact  with  the 
nuchal;  parietals  large,  their  greatest  width  about  three  fourths  of 
their  length;  a  single  pair  of  nuchals  (very  rarely  two  complete 
pairs),  very  deep;  this  followed,  behind  the  outer  half  of  the  scale, 
by  two  differentiated  scales,  one  following  the  other,  the  hindermost 
largest,  separated  from  their  fellows  by  two  scales;  nasal  moderate, 
at  least  partially  divided,  the  posterior  part  behind  nostril  larger 
than  anterior  part;  no  postnasal;  anterior  loreal  not  twice  as  wide 
a-  high,  very  little  higher  than  the  posterior,  which  is  usually  three 
fourths  as  high  as  long,  touching  usually  only  two  labials;  two 
presuboculars;  four  supraoculars,  three  touching  the  frontal;  usually 
eight  or  nine  superciliaries,  the  anterior  nearly  three  times  as  large 
a-  the  last;  a  small  preocular,  followed  by  a  small  scute  and  one  or 
two  small  granules;  a  pair  of  postoculars;  usually  four  postsub- 
oculars;  primary  temporal  large,  rectangular,  broadly  in  contact 
with  the  two  secondary  temporals;  the  upper  of  these  is  very  large, 
nearly  triangular,  the  posterior  edge  emarginate,  followed  poste- 
riorly by  three  nearly  equal-sized  vertical  scales,  the  last  of  which 
contacts  the  larger  of  the  postnuchal  scales;  lower  secondary  tem- 
poral with  sides  nearly  parallel,  the  posterior  end  somewhat  rounded; 
tertiary  temporal  small,  entering  ear;  seven  upper  labials,  the  first 


248 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


slightly  higher  and  larger  than  succeeding  three;  seventh  labial 
always  very  much  larger  than  sixth;  four  median  palpebral  scales 
directly  in  contact  with  the  superciliaries;  lower  eyelid  with  four  or 
five  large  plates  separated  from  the  subocular  by  two  (rarely  three) 
granular  rows;  two  superimposed  postlabials  follow  the  seventh 
labial,  separating  it  from  the  ear;  two  or  three  inconspicuous 
auricular  lobules;  about  20  scales  surrounding  the  ear;  mental  large, 
with  a  labial  border  much  greater  than  rostral ;  postmental  relatively 
small,  undivided;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  anterior  smallest, 
the  third  pair  largest,  followed  by  an  enlarged  postgenial  which  is 
bordered  on  its  anterior  inner  edge  by  a  scale  longer  than  wide. 


Fig.  34.  Eumeces  elegans  Boulenger.  Field  Mus.  No.  7327;  Ningkwo, 
Anhwei,  China.  Male.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 
Actual  head  length,  12.4  mm.;  width,  11  mm. 


Scales  parallel  on  the  sides,  the  median  pair  of  scale  rows  not  or 
very  slightly  larger  than  adjoining  rows  or  the  lateral  scales;  about 
38-40  scales  about  neck  behind  ear;  32-36  scales  about  constricted 
portion  of  the  neck;  38-40  scales  about  body  in  axillary  region; 
about  middle  of  body,  26-28  rows;  about  base  of  tail,  15;  sub- 
caudal  scales  greatly  widened,  about  105  in  the  series;  lateral 
postanal  scute  strongly  keeled;  eight  preanal  scales,  the  median  pair 
very  large,  the  smaller  outer  scales  overlapping  inner  scales. 

Fifteen  scales  about  insertion  of  arm;  a  series  of  five  or  six  rows 
of  granular  scales  in  axilla;  outer  wrist  tubercle  prominent,  with 
two  or  three  smaller  adjacent  scutes;  palm  with  about  four  unequal- 
sized,  enlarged  tubercles;  lamellar  formula  of  fingers:  6;  10;  12;  13; 
8;  the  basal  lamella  of  each  toe  enlarged  and  thickened. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  249 

Eighteen  scales  about  insertion  of  the  leg.  A  patch  of  enlarged 
irregular  scales  on  lower  back  part  of  femur;  heel  with  two  pairs  of 
padlike  tubercles  separated  medially;  sole  with  one  or  two  larger 
tubercles;  a  series  of  more  or  less  equal-sized  scales  reach  the  base 
of  the  fourth  toe;  the  scales  of  the  outer  side  of  the  sole  flat, 
imbricated.  Lamellar  formula  of  toes:  6;  12;  16;  18;  13.  Terminal 
lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about  claws;  intercalated  series  of 
digital  scales  on  the  basal  phalanx  only. 

( 'olor.  Young,  dark  blackish  or  brownish-black,  with  five  strongly 
defined  cream  lines,  the  median  bifurcating  on  nuchal,  extending 
halfway  back  on  tail;  dorsolaterals  from  the  prefrontals  or  the 
first  superciliaries,  follow  the  lower  two  thirds  of  the  third  scale  row, 
rarely  encroaching  on  the  edges  of  the  fourth  posteriorly;  lateral 
line  on  labials  a  series  of  more  or  less  connected  spots,  passes  back 
involving  the  upper  half  or  two-thirds  of  ear,  then  passing  back 
along  the  sixth  and  seventh  row,  chiefly  on  the  sixth  posteriorly; 
below  the  lateral  stripe  there  is  a  lateral  dark  line,  which  grows 
lighter  on  its  lower  edge,  merging  into  the  lighter  gray  color  of  the 
sides  of  abdomen;  immaculate  cream  below.  Tail  blue  above. 
lighter  below,  sometimes  lavender.  This  type  of  coloration  is  re- 
tained with  little  change  in  the  adult  females  save  the  dark  ground 
color,  which  is  less  intense  save  on  the  sides  where  a  broad  darker 
stripe  is  evident.  In  adult  males  the  lighter  lines  gradually  become 
obsolete,  and  in  the  oldest  males  there  is  practically  no  trace  of  the 
typical  pattern.  The  dorsal  surface  becomes  olive,  the  head  yel- 
lowish-red (red  in  life?).  There  is,  however,  usually  a  lateral  brown 
stripe  evident. 

Variation.  Thanks  to  the  authorities  of  the  American  Museum 
of  Natural  History,  and  to  the  courtesy  of  Dr.  G.  K.  Noble  and  Mr. 
Clifford  Pope,  the  very  extensive  series  of  specimens  of  this  museum 
was  made  available  despite  the  fact  that  Mr.  Pope  himself  was 
studying  them  at  the  same  time  for  a  work  on  the  herpetological 
fauna  of  China.  Altogether  about  330  specimens  from  a  large  num- 
ber of  localities  have  been  available.  The  large  number  of  speci- 
mens has  been  almost  bewildering,  and  complete  statistical  data  on 
variation  was  not  taken  on  more  than  a  half  of  the  specimens  by 
me.  The  variational  data  here  presented  is  largely  a  compilation 
from  Pope,  Schmidt,  Stejneger,  and  Van  Denburgh,  as  well  as  data 
taken  by  myself. 

Seven  is  the  typical  number  of  upper  labials,  eight  occurring  (in 
about  300  specimens)    only  six  times.     In  these  eight  specimens, 


250 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


■— 

c 
hi 

a 


c 


s 

6 
Os 


&q 


i-0 

tc 

CM 

CJ 

St.  ■ 

4.  CM 

co 

X 

CM 

t~ 

c-i 

i- 

m 

t>- 

tc 

rt 

"* 

CO 

•"*• 

rH 

rH 

1—1 

'V- 

^ 

CM 

X 

<^  Lt> 

03 

■* 

c 

IG 

CO 

i- 

X 

o 

-t- 

c 

<£  cm 

T}< 

rH 

C) 

~ 

1—1 

oigS   : 

fcj 

in 

X 

«  X 

t^ 

L« 

^ 

o 

c 

X 

03 

O) 

i- 

CO 

LO 

1 — 1 

CM 

CO 

rH 

■ — ' 

CM 

z^t 

aiS 

t> 

CO 

i-O 

CO 

X 

<5rH 

,_, 

re 

in 

co 

_ 

04 

_ 

CM 

JO 

a 

m 

Ol 

i5S"fc 

CO 

i — i 

rH 

CM 

CO 

— H 

i — i 

T-H 

< — i 

CM 

.. 

^ 

P 

t^ 

sic. 
Oct 

■* 

<x 

l£ 

CO 

CM 

m 

O 

_H 

-H 

X 

t^ 

o 

x 

CI 

1 — 1 

C-I 

co 

rH 

— H 

CM 

^H 

™ 

<N 

m 

CO 

.  ■  — ■ 
o  ~.  o 

IN 

lO 

co 

CM 

_ 

c 

CM 

Q 

X 

o 

r- 

CM 

■* 

CM 

CM 

i_;°° 
S" 

CM 

sir- 

t- 

r> 

r- 

IS 

co 

_ 

— 

,~ 

o 

_ 

O) 

r- 

Tf 

h* 

CM 

CO 

.. 

— 

— 

CM 

CO 

rH 

CM 

CM 

sico 
OS* 

c 

CO 

X 

t- 

CM 

iC 

r~ 

to 

CO 

CO 

„ 

X 

Tj 

rH 

CM 

■* 

rH 

.. 

^ 

O) 

co 

rH 

i_;x 

■tf 

si-* 

to 

to 

c 

r- 

-*■ 

lO 

!» 

I- 

in 

■* 

CO 

X 

rH 

cm 

■* 

' 

CM 

CO 

^" 

^J  oo 

§" 

X 

m 

CM 

co 

•X 

CM 

c 

X 

it 

1-0 

-X 

-* 

X 

X 

> 

CM 

~ 

*" 

CM 

CO 

^^ 

fcHCO 

<SCO 

< 

b 

[I 

a 

t 

> 

J_ 

£\ 

c 

a 

1          c 

c 

> 
a 

!      c 

a 
c 

a 

«= 

c 

'c 

c 

I 

0       -= 

*c 

i 

X 

i 

. 

b 

a 

c 

1     * 

) 

|js 

X 

b 

D     _a 

a 

-*- 

^_ 

s 

X 

X 

_a 

a) 

£0    H 

3   —   t. 

e 

r7 

!       C 

c 

c 

— 
•  - 

— 

1 

C      T 

c 

bo 

S2 

5 

7 

:        c 

E= 

3        C 

c 

a 

c 
a 

* 
< 

£ 

« 

IS 

^ 

•- 

n 

J 

> 

5 

to 
c 


J3 

O 

"Si 
c 

3 


J3 

o 

o 


bt 

C3 

C8 


a 

'3 
x; 

en 
bn 
C 


3 

b£ 
C 

'E 
c 


o 


o 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumfxes  251 

five  rather  than  the  typical  four  labials  precede  the  subocular. 
Aboui  22  specimens  have  only  six  upper  labials  on  one  or  both  sides, 
with  only  three  preceding  the  subocular.  The  supraoculars  are 
invariably  four,  but  in  22  specimens  only  two  supraoculars  touch 
the  frontal  on  one  or  both  sides.  The  number  of  scales  between  the 
parietals  and  a  point  above  the  anus  is  54-58,  the  number  56  being 
most  frequent,  while  54  or  55  is  a  close  second.  Higher  numbers 
are  very  rare.  In  264  specimens  the  scale  counts  about  middle  of 
body  are:  2.")  in  nine  specimens;  26  in  166;  27  in  33;  28  in  56.  The 
maximum  size  is  93  mm.,  snout  to  vent  measurement,  five  specimens 
having  been  examined  which  measure  90  mm.  or  more.  Recently 
hatched  specimens  measure  25-28  mm.,  the  larger  size  being  the 
more  frequent. 

Van  Denburgh  (1912)  gives  a  "key"  to  the  variable  characters 
with  relation  to  geographical  habitat.  The  characters  noted  as  to 
number  of  scale  rows  were:  China,  usually  more  than  26;  and 
Koshun  Formosa,  usually  24.  From  my  foregoing  statements  it  is 
seen  that  the  mainland  specimens  have  in  far  larger  proportion  only 
26  scale  rows.  I  have  had  access  to  Van  Denburgh's  material  from 
these  localities  and  the  only  point  of  difference  that  seems  pertinent 
is  a  slightly  lower  average  of  lamellae  under  the  fourth  toe  and  a 
-mailer  size  in  the  Pescadores  specimens.  Moreover,  the  color 
pattern  appears  to  be  lost  earlier  in  both  males  and  females,  and 
the  posttemporal  scales  become  thickened,  as  do  the  other  head 
scales  when  the  specimens  are  smaller.  One  specimen  of  this  lot  has 
the  parietals  enclosing  the  interparietal;  one  has  the  anterior  loreal 
divided;  a  third  has  a  postnasal  on  one  side. 

Boulenger  (1899),  in  speaking  of  the  coloration  of  adult  males, 
mentions  that  they  "have  the  sides  of  head  and  neck  of  a  bright 
vermillion,  which  color  is  continued  on  the  side  of  the  body  as  more 
or  less  distinctly  defined  stripes  above  and  below  the  light  streak 
extending  from  the  ear." 

Szechwan  specimens  mentioned  by  Stejneger  (1926)  have  the 
first  pair  of  chinshields  separated. 

Pope  (1929)  notes  that  the  color  of  the  stripes  in  young  is  gilt. 

Remarks.  Pope  (1929)  expresses  the  opinion  that  this  species 
is  generally  a  mountain  form,  and  states  that  it  was  never  seen 
on  the  open  irrigated  plains  of  the  plateaux  and  the  valleys.  Pope 
1 1929  I  also  states  that  the  young  emerge  from  their  underground 
"ne<ts"  about  the  first  and  second  weeks  of  August.  There  are  from 
7   to  10  eggs  in   a   clutch.     The  size  of  the   fully  developed   eggs 


252 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


(ready  to  hatch)  are  24  to  26  mm.  by  12  to  13.2  mm.  The  shell  is 
yellow-brown.  The  largest  specimen  measured  by  Pope  was  96  mm. 
snout  to  vent. 

Both  Stejneger  and  Van  Denburgh  realized  the  lack  of  wisdom 
in  naming  the  Formosan  and  Pescadores  Islands  forms.  In  neither 
are  the  scale  variants  of  such  a  character  as  to  warrant  such  treat- 
ment; while  the  precocious  attainment  of  adult  characters,  and  the 
apparently  smaller  size  of  the  specimens  from  the  Pescadores 
Islands  may  seem  important,  I  do  not  care  to  christen  them  with  a 
trinomial. 

Distribution.  The  species  is  widely  distributed  on  the  Asiatic 
mainland,  occurring  from  the  coast  to  the  central  plateau  region,  in 
the  Chinese  Provinces  bordering  the  Yangtze,  and  lying  to  the  south. 
I  have  records  for  all  provinces  except  Kweichow  and  Kwangsi.  It 
is  also  known  from  the  Chusan  Archipelago,  Pescadores  Islands, 
and  Formosa. 


#  &legans 


Fig.  35.   Distribution  of  the  continental  Asiatic  species  of  the 

Fasciatm  group. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  253 

Locality  records: 

China: 

Chekiang:    Mo-Kan-Shan,  near  Hue-how.  1.000-1,500  ft.  elev.  (C.A.S.  5); 

Xingpo  (Brit.  Mus.  5);  Snowy  Valley,  Ningpo  (Brit.  Mus.  4);  Chusan 

Archipelago  (Brit.  Mus.  2);  Da-laensaen,  s\\   Ningpo  (Brit.  Mus.  4) ; 

Tune;  Yung  Is.  (Brit.  Mus.  6) ;  Tunglu  (Mich.  20);  Chapoo  (Boettger. 

1S94);   Wenchow   (U.S.N.M.   1)    (M.C.Z.  2);   Zungli    (U.S.N.M.   10) 

(M.C.Z.  63) ;  Geng-shin  (M.C.Z.  2). 
Kiangsu:    Nanking  (C.A.S.  4);  Shanghai  (Brit.  Mus.  2)   (Sun.  1926). 
Fukien:    (Basel   1)    (A.M.X.H.  2);    Foochow   (C.A.S.  6)    (U.S.N.M.  6) 

(K.U.  1);   Kuatun,  N.  W.  Fukien   (Brit.  Mus.  numerous  specimens) 

(Field    2);    Yenping    (Field    3)     (A.M.X.H.    15);    Ch'ungan    Hsien 

(A.M.X.H.  179). 
Kiangsi:     Kiukiang    Mts.    (Brit.    Mus.    1);    Pingshiang    (Senckenb.    1) 

(Miinchen  Z.S.B.S.  4)  (Basel  1). 
Yunnan:    (A.M.X.H.  2);  Yunnan  Fu  (Brit.  Mus.  3)  (A.M.X.H.  1). 
Hunan:   Changsha  (A.M.X.H.  1). 
Anhwei:   Ningwo  (Field  7)  (A.M.X.H.  27). 
Hupeh:  Ichang  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Kwangtung:   Canton  (Yogt,  1914). 
Szechwan:  Wanhsien  (A.M.X.H.  1);  Suifu  (U.S.N.M.  3) ;  Kiating 

(U.S. X.M.I). 
Formosa:    {CAS.  1);  Kan-shirei  (C.A.S.  18);  Maru  Yama  (C.A.S.  2); 

San-shi-ka  (C.A.S.  1) ;  Taiuan  (C.A.S.  1) ;  Keelung  (C.A.S.  2) ;  Taipah 

(C.A.S.  1);  Tamsuy  (Brit.  Mus.  1);  Taipa  (U.S.X.M.  1)    (Sci.  Coll. 

Tokyo  2). 
Pescadores  Is.:    (C.A.S.  15)  (Brit.  Mus.  4)  (Sci.  Coll.  Tokyo  1). 

Eumcces  oshimensis  Thompson 

(Figs.   36,  40) 
SYNONYMY 

1881.  Eumeces  quinqudincatus  Doederlein.  Mitt.  Deutsch  Ostasian  Ges.,  Bd.  Ill,  Heft  24, 
1880-1884   (1881),  p.    147    ('Amami   Oshima"). 

1912.  Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson.  Herpetological  notices,  No.  2.  June  28,  1912,  p.  4, 
privately  printed  (type  description:  type  locality  Kikaigashima,  Loo  Choo  Islands; 
type  C.A.S.  No.  21729:  Kuhne  Coll.);  Barbour,  Occ.  Papers  Mus.  Zool.  U.  of  Mich., 
Nn.    44.    Sept.    12,    1917.    pp.    1-9    (regarding   date   of   publication    of   type    description). 

1912.  Eumeces  maryinatus  amamiensis  Van  Denburgh.  Advance  Diagnoses  of  New  Rept. 
Amph.  from  Loo  Choo  Is.  and  Formosa,  privately  printed,  July  29,  1912,  pp.  4,  5 
(type  description;  type  locality,  "Amami  Oshima.  Loo  Choo  Islands,  Japan":  type 
C.A.S.  No.  21615);  and  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  III,  1908-1913  (Dec.  16,  1912), 
pp.  217-219  (Amaniensis  [sic])  (detailed  description  with  a  discussion  of  variations 
and  relationshipl. 

1912.  Eumeces  maryinatus  kikaigensis  Van  Denburgh.  Adv.  Diag.  New  Rept.  Amph.  Loo 
Choo  Is.  Formosa,  July  29,  1912,  p.  5,  privately  printed  (type  description;  type 
locality  "Kikaigo  shima,  Loo  Choo  Islands";  Kuhne  Coll.);  and  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.. 
(4),  III,  1908-1913  (Dec.  16,  1912),  pp.  219-221  (complete  description,  with  a  dis- 
cussion of  variation  and  relationship). 

History.  Apparently  the  first  record  of  this  species  is  that  of 
Doederlein  (1881)  who  reports  Eumeces  quinquelineatus  from 
"Amami-Oshima"  as  follows:  "Von  Eidechsen  fand  ich  Eumeces 
(|iiinquelineatus  L.  sehr  hausig." 


254  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

In  1912,  from  a  large  series  of  specimens  in  the  California  Acad- 
emy of  Science,  the  species  was  described  by  Surgeon  J.  C.  Thomp- 
son as  follows:  "Specimens  from  Amamioshima  and  Kikaigashima, 
two  islands  in  the  Oshima  group  of  the  Loo  Choos  may  be  distin- 
guished from  the  typical  form  found  in  Okinawa  Island.  They 
differ  in  having  regularly  28  scale  rows  round  the  middle  of  the 
body,  and  in  the  two  dorsal  series  not  being  enlarged.  These 
differences  appear  constant  through  a  fairly  large  series." 

'Tor  those  who  feel  the  necessity  of  giving  to  such  a  geographical 
variation  a  new  name  or  of  promoting  it  to  subspecific  rank,  the 
name  Eumeces  oshimensis  is  proposed.  The  type  would  then  be 
No.  21729,  California  Academy  of  Sciences;  male;  April,  1910, 
Kikaigashima,  Loo  Choo  Islands."  The  date  on  the  private  pub- 
lication is  June  25,  1912. 

A  little  more  than  one  month  later  (July  29,  1912)  Dr.  John 
Van  Denburgh  published  privately  a  short  paper  describing  two 
subspecific  forms  of  Eumeces  marginatus  from  the  material  men- 
tioned in  the  preceding  paper,  a  form  called  Eumeces  marginatus 
kikaigensis  and  one  called  Eumeces  marginatus  amamiensis. 

The  first  of  these  is  from  the  type  locality  of  Thompson's 
oshimensis.    It  is  described  as  follows: 

"Diagnosis.  One  azygous  postmental ;  no  patch  of  much  enlarged  scales  on 
back  of  thigh;  no  postnasal;  posterior  loreal  usually  long,  usually  in  contact 
with  three  superlabials ;  sixteen  to  twenty-one  plates  under  fourth  toe;  usually 
twenty-eight  (sometimes  twenty-six)  scales  around  middle  of  body;  young 
with  one  median  and  two  lateral  light  lines,  latter  narrow  and  separated  by 
not  less  than  width  of  two  scales;  lower  lateral  line  separated  from  forelimb  by 
less  than  distance  between  lateral  lines,  and  running  at  about  the  level  of  top 
of  hind  limb  but  below  top  of  ear;  scales  of  first  row  on  each  side  of  middorsal 
line  usually  not  appreciably  wider  than  those  of  next  dorsal  rows.  Super- 
ciliaries  not  less  than  eight;  upper  lateral  line  broader,  on  scales  of  third  and 
fourth  rows  from  middorsal  line." 

"Type.  California  Academy  of  Sciences,  No.  21.628.  Kikaig  Oshima.  Loo 
Choo  Islands,  Apr.  30,  1910." 

The  second  subspecies  is  described  as  follows: 

"One-  azygous  postmental;  no  patch  of  much  enlarged  scales  on  back  of 
thigh ;  no  postnasal ;  posterior  loreal  long,  usually  in  contact  with  three  supra- 
labials;  seventeen  to  twenty-one  plates  under  fourth  toe;  twenty-six  (rarely 
twenty-four  or  twenty-eight)  scales  around  the  middle  of  body;  young  with 
one  median  and  two  lateral  light  lines,  latter  broader  but  separated  by  not 
less  than  width  of  two  scales;  lower  lateral  line  separated  from  forelimb  tax- 
less than  distance  between  lateral  lines,  and  running  at  about  the  level  of  top 
of  hind  limb  but  below  top  of  ear;  scales  of  first  row  on  each  side  of  middorsal 
line  very  rarely  wider  than  those  of  next  dorsal  rows;   superciliaries  not  less 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  255 

than   eight;    upper  lateral  line  broader,  on  scales  of  third  and  fourth  rows, 
from  middorsal  line." 

"Type.  California  Academy  of  Sciences.  No.  2161").  Amami  Oshima,  Loo 
Choo  Islands.  Japan.  April  26  to  May   1.  1910." 

It  is  obvious  from  a  perusal  of  the  two  Van  Denburgh  descrip- 
tions that  the  characters  used  to  separate  the  subspecies  are  so 
trivial  that  in  my  opinion  the  separation  is  unwarranted;  hence  the 
two  forms  are  here  regarded  as  synonyms  and.  likewise,  synonyms 
of  Eunn  ccs  oshinn  nsis  Thompson. 

Diagnosis.  Closely  related  to  and  having  general  characters  of 
Eumeces  marginatus  but  the  two  median  scale  rows  not  distinctly 
widened;  the  dorsolateral  light  line  on  the  third  and  fourth  scale 
rows;  26  or  28  scale  rows  around  the  body;  no  postnasal;  one 
postmental. 

Description  of  species  (from  topotypes).  Portion  of  rostral  visi- 
ble above,  large,  often  approaching  the  size  of  the  frontonasal; 
supranasals  rather  large,  occasionally  nearly  as  large  as  the  pre- 
frontals; frontonasal  moderate,  wider  than  long  or  the  length 
equalling  the  width,  almost  always  in  contact  rather  broadly  with 
the  frontal;  prefrontals  variable  in  size,  their  longest  suture  with 
the  frontonasal;  frontal  elongate,  longer  than  its  distance  from  the 
end  of  the  snout,  wider  anteriorly,  touching  three  supraoculars; 
frontoparietals  longer  than  wide,  forming  a  median  suture  al- 
most always  larger  than  the  prefrontals;  interparietal  usually  of 
equal  or  greater  area  than  a  frontoparietal,  in  contact  with  the 
nuchal;  normally  one  pair  of  nuchals,  rarely  none,  or  two;  the  two 
scales  following  outer  half  of  nuchals  enlarged,  the  anterior  usually 
the  smaller;  nasal  moderate,  divided  by  a  suture,  the  anterior  part 
often  the  size  of  the  posterior;  no  postnasal;  anterior  loreal  higher 
than  posterior,  the  lower  part  usually  wider  than  upper;  posterior 
loreal  longer  than  high,  usually  in  contact  with  three  labials;  two 
presuboculars,  the  anterior  usually  not  larger  than  the  posterior; 
usually  nine  super ciliaries,  rarely  eight  or  ten,  the  anterior  at  leas! 
twice  as  large  as  posterior;  a  small  preocular;  four  supraoculars. 
the  largest  wider  than  the  frontal;  four  or  five  postsuboculars;  two 
small  postoculars.  The  median  palpebral  scales  in  contact  with  the 
superciliaries ;  primary  temporal  nearly  rectangular,  rather  large; 
lower  secondary  narrow,  elongate,  the  sides  nearly  parallel,  some- 
what rounded  posteriorly;  upper  secondary  very  large,  triangular. 
emarginate  behind,  followed  by  two  or  three  scales,  the  anterior 
usually  the  smallest.     (These  more  or  less  thickened  in  old  males.) 


256 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Seven  upper  labials,  the  last  largest,  much  larger  than  sixth;  the 
first  larger  than  the  three  succeeding  scales;  lower  eyelid  with  five 
or  more  large  opaque  scales,  separated  from  the  subocular  by  two 
(rarely  more)  rows  of  granules;  two  superimposed  postlabials,  the 
lower  largest,  both  entering  auricular  border  or  separated  from  it 
by  a  small  scale;  usually  three  small  auricular  lobules;  usually  six 
lower  labials;  postmental  single,  large;  three  pairs  of  chinshields, 
the  anterior  smallest;  a  large  postgenial,  bordered  internally  by 
scales  longer  than  wide;  17  to  20  scales  about  the  ear. 

Scales  on  sides  parallel ;  median  scales  on  the  back  not  wider  than 
adjoining  rows.    Scales  about  neck  behind  ear  34  to  36;  about  con- 


Fig.  36.  Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson.  U.S.N.M.  No.  64210  (C.A.S. 
No.  21547) ;  Amamioshima,  Loo  Choo  Islands,  Japan.  A,  lateral  view  of 
head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.    Actual  head  length,  14  mm.;  width,  12  mm. 

stricted  portion  of  neck  28-32;  about  axillary  region  36-38;  about 
middle  of  body  26-28;  15-17  about  the  base  of  the  tail;  100-103  sub- 
caudals,  much  widened;  six  or  eight  scales  border  the  anus,  the 
median  pair  greatly  enlarged,  outer  diminishing  in  size,  the  outer 
scales  overlapping  the  inner.  A  large,  well-differentiated,  keeled, 
lateral  postanal  scute;  about  thirteen  scales  about  arm  insertion; 
lateral  wrist  tubercles  usually  two  or  three;  four  or  five  scattered 
palmar  tubercles;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  7;  12;  12;  13;  9, 
the  basal  lamellae  enlarged.  About  19  scales  around  insertion  of 
hind  limb;  two  inner  heel  tubercles,  usually  padlike,  outer  pair 
either  flat  or  rounded;  outer  scales  on  sole  somewhat  large,  usually 
imbricate;  no  or  only  one  small  sole  tubercle;  lamellar  formula  for 
toes:  8;  12;  18;  21;  13.  Terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about 
claws;  intercalated  scales  on  the  fourth  toe  not  or  rarely  extending 


Taylor:    Thk  Genus  Eumeces  257 

beyond  the  basal  phalanx.  Limbs  well  developed;  limbs,  adpressed, 
overlapping  the  length  of  fourth  toe  or  somewhat  more.  Pitting 
on  scales  rather  inconspicuous,  largely  obsolete  in  adults,  but  some 
in  posthumeral  and  postfemoral  region. 

Color.  Typically  five-lined  in  young,  the  median  cream  line 
bifurcating  on  the  nuchal,  the  branches  running  forward  and  re- 
uniting in  very  young,  but  in  somewhat  older  specimens  appear  to 
terminate  on  the  prefrontals;  posteriorly  the  median  line  terminates 
a  short  distance  back  of  the  base  of  the  tail;  the  dorsolateral  line 
begins  on  the  first  supraocular  and  follows  back  the  edges  of  the 
third  and  fourth  scale  rows,  continuing  a  short  distance  on  the  tail; 
lateral  light  line  represented  on  labials  by  a  few  spots,  then  passes 
through  the  middle  of  the  ear  and  follow-  along  side  on  the  sixth 
scale  row,  usually.  The  general  ground  color  is  blackish  in  young, 
but  very  early  becomes  a  dark  brown,  and  later  an  olive  color  ap- 
pears in  the  middle  of  each  scale,  while  the  darker  color  is  evident 
only  along  the  dorsolateral  and  median  cream  lines.  The  area  be- 
tween the  dorsolateral  and  lateral  lines  is  usually  darker  brown  than 
the  back  and  this  color  is  never  completely  lost;  the  ventral  surfaces 
are  creamy  white,  save  on  the  tail  in  very  voting,  where,  like  the 
dorsal  surface,  it  is  blue. 

Young  adult  and  old  males  lose  practically  all  evidence  of  cream 
lines,  becoming  a  uniform  brown-olive  above,  with  a  lateral  brown 
or  reddish-brown  stripe  from  the  snout  along  the  side  to  the  base 
of  the  tail.  This  brown  line  is  bordered  below  by  light  grayish, 
which  merges  into  the  cream  color  of  the  ventral  surfaces.  There 
is  in  many  specimens  a  suggestion  of  the  lateral  line  and  it  is  most 
evident  behind  the  ear,  when  present. 

The  heads  of  old  males  become  much  widened,  and  take  on  an 
amber  or  light  yellow-brown  color.  In  certain  old  males  the  entire 
upper  surface  of  body  is  light  brown,  with  no  evidence  of  markings 
in  front  or  back  of  ear.  The  adult  females  retain  some  trace  of  the 
median  and  dorsolateral  lines,  but  these  are  now  of  a  shade  of  brown 
or  olive  and  usually  dim,  and  the  ground  color  never  becomes  as 
uniform  as  in  the  males. 

Variation.  Among  the  79  specimens  available  to  Van  Denburgh, 
he  noted  that  all  have  one  postmental,  no  postnasal.  There  were 
only  two  exceptions  in  which  the  frontal  and  frontonasal  were 
separated.  Two  specimens  had  the  frontonasal  divided.  Only  two 
specimens  failed  to  have  the  posterior  loreal  touch  three  labials  on 
one  side  or  the  other;  the  scales  around  the  middle  of  the  body  are 

17—1123 


258 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Measurements  of  Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson 


Museum . 
Number*. 
Sex 


Snout  to  vent. .  . 

Tail 

Snout  to  foreleg. 
Snout  to  eye. . .  . 
Snout  to  ear.  .  .  . 
Axilla  to  groin  .  . 
Width  of  head .  . 
Length  of  head . . 
Width  of  body.  . 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Longest  toe 


C.A.S 

21610 

a* 


99 


35 

8.5 
24 
52 
18 
22 
18 
29 
40 
14   2 


C.A.S. 
21539 


99 


37 

8.8 
23 
52 
20 
23 
19 
28 
40 
14 


C.A.S. 
21565 

9 


80 


24 
7 

15.5 
44 
15 

14 . 5 
18 
23 
32 
12 


C.A.S 

21568 


74 

11.5 
25 
7 
15.5 
39 
14 
16 
16 
22 
31 
12 


C.A.S. 
21613 

9 


69 


22 
6 
14 
35 
12 
14 
12 
20 
28 
11 


C.A.S 
21561 

cT 


56 


20 
5.2 
12 
2S 
10 

11.4 
12 
17 
24 
10 


C.A.S. 
21585 


56 
97 
20.4 
5.4 
12 
28 
10 

11.8 
12 

17.2 
25 
10 


C.A.S 
21562 

& 


52 


18 

4 

11 

26 

8 

9 

11 

15 

21 

9 


.8 


C.A.S. 
21580 

yg- 


42 
66 
16 

4 

9.2 
22 

6.8 

8.8 

9 
13 
19.2 

8 


*  All   from  Amamioshima. 

26  in  all  but  three  specimens;  two  have  24,  and  one  has  28  (if 
counts  are  made  three  scales  farther  forward  the  percentage  with 
28  increases  to  nearly  50  percent) .  The  frontal  touches  three 
supraoculars  on  each  side  except  in  three  cases,  where  there  are 
two  on  one  side  only.  Lamellae  under  the  fourth  toe  vary  between 
17  and  21,  18  and  19  of  most  frequent  occurrence. 

The  scales  on  the  back  of  the  femur  are  slightly  enlarged,  but 


Fig.  37.  Eumeces  oshimensis  Thompson.  C.A.S.  No.  21554;  Amamio- 
shima, Loo  Choo  Islands,  Japan.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view 
of  head.    Actual  head  length,  about  17.5  mm.;  width,  about  14.2  mm. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  259 

these  do  not  form  a  patch  nor  are  the  scales  irregular  in  shape. 
Van  Denburgh  notes  that  some  of  the  specimens  have  slightly  en- 
larged middorsals.  This  seems  to  be  relatively  true,  due  to  the 
smaller  size  of  the  adjoining  scale  rows. 

The  variation  obtaining  in  the  specimen  from  Kikaigashima 
[Eumeces  marginatum  kikaigensis  Van  Denburgh)  is  small.  Here, 
too,  the  relations  of  the  temporals,  dorsal  head  scales  and  lateral 
head  scales  are  unusually  constant.  The  upper  labials  are  eight 
on  one  side  in  three  specimens;  in  the  others  the  usual  seven  are 
present.  There  is  only  a  single  pair  of  nuchals  normally  in  the 
series  of  17  specimens  examined  (in  one  specimen  there  are  two  on 
one  side).  I  am  at  a  total  loss  to  understand  Van  Denburgh's 
statement  (1912,  p.  220):  "One  specimen  has  a  single  pair  of 
nuchals:  one  has  two  on  one  side  and  three  on  the  other;  the  others 
all  have  three  pairs,  the  anterior  larger."  The  larger  number  of 
specimens  have  28  scale  rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body,  but 
the  percentage  is  just  above  60.  The  largest  specimen  from  this 
island  I  have  measured  is  a  male  of  87  mm.  from  snout  to  vent. 

Ii'<  marks.  The  use  of  the  name  oshimensis  Thompson  for  the 
form  from  Amamigunto  is  necessitated  by  the  date  on  Thompson's 
privately  printed  paper  dated  June  25,  1912.  Van  Denburgh's 
privately  printed  paper  (see  synonymy)  was  not  issued  until  July 
29,  1912.  Regardless  of  the  ''right"  in  this  controversial  melange 
Thompson's  name  is  the  earlier,  unless  it  can  be  proved  that  the 
date  is  fictitious,  a  matter  in  which  I  have  no  opinion  (see  Bar- 
bour, 1917  i . 

The  separation  of  oshimensis  from  marginatus  is  based  perhaps 
on  relatively  minor  characters,  but  on  the  whole  these  appear  as 
constant  as  characters  are  in  the  genus.  Furthermore,  satisfactory 
series  are  available  and  in  the  case  of  oshimensis  a  very  large  series. 

However,  an  attempt  to  separate  the  Amamioshima  specimens 
from  those  on  Kikaigashima  is,  I  believe,  futile.  The  characters 
on  which  Van  Denburgh  made  such  a  separation  are  of  such  a 
nature,  and  their  variability  so  great,  that  I  am  of  the  opinion  that 
this  should  not  stand.  Moreover,  one  of  the  chief  characters  given 
is  the  presence  of  three  nuchals,  a  statement  due  to  error. 

Distribution.  As  here  interpreted  the  species  is  confined  to 
Amamigunto,  comprising  Amamioshima,  Kikaigashima,  Tokinosh- 
ima,  Okinoyerabujima  and  Yoronjima,  although  at  present  records 
are  confined  to  the  two  larger  islands  only.  (See  Fig.  40  for  dis- 
tributional map.) 


260  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Locality  records: 

Amamioshima  (C.A.S.  73,  including  types  of  amamiensis  and  oshimensis) 
(Doederlein,  1881)  (A.M.N.H.  2)  (U.S.N.M.  1)  (M.C.Z.  1)  (A.N.S.P.  1, 
No.  9380) 

Kikaigashima  (C.A.S.  19,  including  types  of  kikaigensis.)  (Brit.  Mus.  2). 

Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson 

(Plate  19;    Figs.  38,   40) 
SYNONYMY 

1912.  Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson.  Herp.  Notices  No.  2,  Desc.  New  Spec.  Rept.  Batr.  from 
the  Far  East,  privately  printed,  San  Francisco,  June  28,  1912,  p.  4  (type  description; 
the  type  locality,  Ishigaki  Is.,  Loo  Choo  Islands;  type.  No.  2104.").  Cal.  Acad.  Sci., 
V.  Kuhne  Coll.);  and  Herp.  Notices  No.  3,  privately  printed,  San  Francisco,  July  31, 
1912,  p.   4   (mentioned  as  an  addition  to  the  fauna  of  Loo  Choo  Archipelago). 

1912.  Eumeces  ishigakiensis  Van  Denburgh.  Advance  Diagnoses  of  New  Reptiles  Amph. 
from  Loo  Choo  and  Formosa,  privately  printed,  San  Francisco,  July  29,  1912,  pp.  5,  f> 
(type  description;  type  locality,  Ishigaki  Shima,  Loo  Choo  Islands,  Japan:  V.  Kuhne 
Coll.);  and  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  III,  1908-1913  (Dec.  16,  1912),  pp.  221-223 
(redescription). 

1917.  Eumeces  stimpsonii  Barbour.  Occ.  Papers  Mus.  Zocil.  Univ.  Mich.,  No.  44,  Sept.  12, 
1917,  p.   2. 

History.  The  species  was  collected  in  Ishigakijima  by  V.  Kuhne. 
who  obtained  a  large  series  consisting  of  33  specimens.  These,  to- 
gether with  other  species,  were  studied  by  Doctor  Van  Denburgh 
and  the  descriptions  placed  into  manuscript  previous  to  January, 

1911.  This  manuscript  was  presented  for  publication  on  May  18, 

1912,  and  was  published  on  December  16,  1912.  Between  the  time 
the  manuscript  was  presented  and  the  date  of  its  publication,  both 
the  manuscript  and  the  specimens  were  available  to  Surgeon  J.  C. 
Thompson,  U.  S.  N.,  who  published  privately  a  series  of  three 
papers,  one  of  which,  the  second,  contained  a  description  of  Eumeces 
stimsonii,  based  on  C.A.S.  No.  21645  of  the  Ishigakijima  series. 
Van  Denburgh  learned  of  Thompson's  intention  to  do  this,  but  not 
knowing  that  the  descriptions  were  in  print,  extracted  from  his 
manuscript  short  diagnoses  and  printed  them  privately,  the  paper 
appearing  July  29,  1912,  a  month  later  than  the  date  which  appears 
on  the  second  Thompson  paper.  At  the  present  time  it  seems 
unavailing  to  question  the  date  of  this  latter  paper,  and  regardless 
of  the  ethical  question  involved  it  seems  that  Thompson's  name 
must  be  recognized,  since  it  has  a  technical  priority  of  thirty  days. 
[See  Barbour  (1917)  for  further  data  on  this  "regrettable  tangle 
of  names."] 

Diagnosis.  A  seven-lined  species,  having  a  median  line  bifurcat- 
ing on  the  head,  a  dorsolateral  line  from  the  first  superciliary,  a 
lateral  line  passing  above  the  ear,  and  a  sublateral  line;  scale  rows 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  261 

26  (rarely  24  or  28)  :  no  postnasal;  one  postmental;  upper  secondary 
temporal  large,  fan-shaped,  emarginate  behind;  lower  secondary 
narrow,  elongate;  a  keeled  lateral  postanal  scale;  limbs  overlapping 
when  adpressed. 

Description  of  the  species  (from  the  paratype  series i.  Portion  of 
the  rostral  visible  above  more  than  half  the  size  of  the  frontonasal; 
supranasals  very  large,  sometimes  approaching  the  size  of  the 
prefrontals,  forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal  broader  than 
long,  in  contact  with  the  anterior  loreal  (rarely  not  I ,  and  usually 
forming  a  suture  with  the  frontal;  prefrontal  variable  in  size, 
usually  separated,  occasionally  forming  a  median  suture,  the  suture 


8 


Fig.  38.  Eumeces  stimsonii  Thompson.  C.A.S.  Xo.  21670;  Ishigakijima. 
A.  lateral  view  of  head;  B.  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head  length,  10 
mm.;  width,  11  mm. 

with  the  frontonasal  always  largest;  frontal  elongate,  about  one 
fourth  longer  than  its  distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  somewhat 
wider  anteriorly  than  posteriorly,  touching  three  supraoculars, 
pointed  (or  truncate)  anteriorly;  frontoparietals  usually  larger  than 
the  prefrontals,  generally  rectangular  in  shape,  larger  than,  or 
about  equal  in  area  to,  the  interparietal;  latter  usually  in  contact 
with  nuchals  (one  exception  I  ;  parietals  rather  narrower  than  usual 
in  the  genus;  a  pair  of  nuchals  widened  longitudinally;  two  differ- 
entiated scales  following  the  nuchals  on  their  outer  ends,  one  follow- 
ing the  other,  the  posterior  the  larger,  the  two  separated  from  their 
fellows  by  two  body  scale-. 

Nasal  moderate,  not  completely  segmented,  the  posterior  part  as 
large  as  part   anterior  to  nostril;   no  postnasal;  anterior  loreal  a 


262  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

little  higher  than  the  posterior;  latter  typical,  longer  than  high; 
two  presuboculars;  a  small  preocular,  followed  above  by  a  smaller 
scale  and  five  granules;  four  or  five  postsuboculars  and  two  small 
postoculars;  eight  or  nine  superciliaries,  the  anterior  three  times  as 
large  as  the  posterior;  primary  temporal  nearly  rectangular,  of 
about  same  width  as,  but  shorter  than,  the  lower  secondary,  with 
which  it  is  in  contact;  lower  secondary  narrow,  rounded  posteriorly, 
the  upper  and  lower  sides  approaching  the  parallel ;  upper  secondary 
temporal  large,  fan-shaped,  emarginate  behind,  followed  by  three 
enlarged,  nearly  equal  sized  scales,  one  following  the  other.  In 
the  adult  males  these  scales,  together  with  those  previously  men- 
tioned following  the  nuchals,  become  much  thickened  and  of  the 
same  general  character  as  the  head  scales;  tertiary  temporal  rela- 
tively short,  entering  (usually)  the  edge  of  ear,  in  contact  with 
the  small  lobules. 

Seven  upper  labials,  the  first  a  little  larger  and  higher  than  the 
three  succeeding  labials;  seventh  more  than  once  and  a  half  the  area 
of  the  sixth,  followed  by  a  superimposed  pair  of  postlabials,  the 
lower  larger  and  more  elongate;  usually  six  lower  labials;  mental 
large,  deep,  with  a  much  greater  labial  border  than  the  rostral;  a 
single  undivided  postmental,  followed  by  three  pairs  of  chinshields, 
the  anterior  smallest  (rarely  fused  with  the  postmental)  ;  postgenial 
differentiated,  bordered  on  the  anterior  internal  side  by  a  scale 
longer  than  wide;  five  upper  palpebral  scales  join  the  superciliaries 
directly;  lower  eyelid  with  four  or  five  enlarged  plates  separated 
from  the  subocular  by  two  rows  of  granules  (sometimes  part  of  a 
third);  ear  surrounded  by  18  to  20  scales;  usually  three  incon- 
spicuous ear  lobules;  scales  parallel  on  sides,  the  median  rows  equal 
to  or  somewhat  smaller  than  the  lateral  series;  scale  rows  behind 
ear,  34  to  37;  around  neck,  29  to  31;  about  middle  of  body,  24  to  26 
(one  specimen  28);  15  to  16  about  base  of  tail;  scales  in  a  row 
from  parietals  to  above  anus,  54  to  57;  subcaudals  much  widened; 
a  well-differentiated,  keeled,  lateral  postanal  scale;  preanals  eight, 
median  pair  very  large,  outer  diminishing  in  size  and  overlapping 
the  inner;  about  14  scales  around  insertion  of  arm;  a  group  of  three 
or  four  scales  of  unequal  size  in  place  of  the  outer  wrist  tubercle; 
four  enlarged,  padlike  tubercles  on  the  palm,  the  basal  lamellae  of 
fingers  also  padlike;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  7,  11,  13,  13,  7; 
about  15  scales  around  the  insertion  of  the  hind  limb;  a  pair  of 
rather  large  padlike  scales  on  the  heel,  separated  by  granules,  each 
preceded  by  one  or  two  enlarged  tubercles  or  padlike  scales;  outer 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces 


263 


side  of  foot  covered  with  rather  large,  flat,  imbricate  scales;  lamellar 
formula  for  toes:  7.  11,  15,  20,  12;  basal  lamellae  not  enlarged; 
terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about  the  claws;  lateral  inter- 
calated scales  on  fourth  toe  not  extending  beyond  the  basal  joint. 

Usually  three  or  four  pits  are  present  on  the  scales  on  the  side  of 
the  neck,  more  numerous  in  the  axillary  region  and  in  the  post- 
humeral  and  postfemoral  regions.  In  the  post  femoral  region  there 
is  a  suggestion  of  the  enlarged  and  irregular  condition  of  the  scales 
such  as  one  finds  in  elcgans;  the  larger  scales,  however,  are  in 
regular  series. 

Color.  Above  black  (in  young)  or  brownish-black  to  olive  (old 
males  i.  In  the  young  the  pattern  consists  of  seven  cream  lines, 
the  median  dividing  and  forming  a  pair  of  lines  on  the  head  that 
reunite  anteriorly.  The  dorsolaterals  begin  on  the  first  superciliary, 
follow  the  third  scale  row  and  extend  about  one  fourth  the  length 
of  the  tail.  The  lateral  line  begins  near  the  rostral,  follows  the 
labials  (as  a  continuous  line  or  as  a  series  of  irregular  spots  in 
older  specimens),  diagonally  rising  posteriorly  passing  above  the 
ear,  following  the  fifth  scale  row  to  the  tail;  the  sublateral  begins 
behind  the  ear  and  passes  back  along  the  side  on  the  seventh 
scale  row. 

The  chin,  throat,  breast  and  underside  of  limbs  are  cream;  the 
abdomen  is  dull  greenish  or  bluish-gray,  the  tail  usually  bluish. 
The  hind  leg  has  traces  of  light  lines.     In  males  the  median  line 


Measurements  of  Eumeccs  stimsorrii  Thompson 


Museum. 
Number. 
Sex 


Snout  to  vent  .  . 

Tail 

Snout  to  eye. . 
Snout  to  ear.  .  .  . 
Snout  to  foreleg. 
Axilla  to  groin.  . 
Width  of  head  .  . 
Length  of  head. . 
Width  of  body.  . 

Foreleg 

Hind  leg 

Longest  toe 


CAS. 

21646 

cf 


63 


5.2 
13 
23 
33 
10.2 
12 
12 
1.5 
23 

9 


C.A.S. 
21670 

cf 


60 


4.7 
13.5 

20 
31 
10 
11 
11 
15 
23 
8.5 


C.A.S. 

21655 

9 


60 
89 

4.3 
10.5 
19 
30 

8.4 

9.5 

9 
16 
22 

8.9 


C.A.S. 
21672 

cf 


5.s 


4.7 
11.7 
21.5 
28 

9 

10.7 
10 

16.2 
23 

8.2 


C.A.S. 

21663 

& 


56 


4.7 
12.1 
19 
30 
10 

11.2 
10 

15.2 
22 

8 


C.A.S. 

21674 

cf 


54 


4.2 
11 

18.7 
28 

8.3 
10 

9 
14. S 
21   6 

9 


C.A.S. 
21656 

cf 


52 
82 

4 

10.5 
19 
27 

8.2 
10.2 

8 
15 
20.3 

8.5 


C.A.S. 

21653 

9 


49 
79 

4 

10 

17.4 
25 

7.2 

9.4 

9 
14 
21 

8 


C.A.S. 

21652 

yg- 


27 

35 
2.4 
6.3 

11.4 

11.2 
4.4 
6.5 
4.8 
8 

12 
4.4 


264  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

grows  dim  in  early  middle  age  as  does  the  sublateral;  the  dark 
line  between  the  dorsolateral  line  and  the  lateral  becomes  a  deep 
brown;  the  head  becomes  a  yellowish-brown.  The  underside  of  the 
tail  becomes  dirty  white  and  the  upper  part  gray  or  olive.  In  very 
old  males  the  color  is  nearly  uniform  olive,  with  usually  some  trace 
of  the  lateral  brown  stripe. 

Variation.  A  total  of  29  specimens  have  been  available  of  the 
original  series  of  33.  Van  Denburgh  (1912)  has  called  attention  to 
the  fact  that  certain  of  the  specimens  show  an  incipient  enlarge- 
ment of  certain  postfemoral  scales.  These,  however,  are  usually 
in  regular  rows,  the  scales  only  occasionally  showing  a  change  in 
shape  suggestive  of  those  in  elegans  and  related  species  on  the  main- 
land. None  show  more  than  a  single  postmental  and  the  postnasal 
is  invariably  lacking.  Two  anomalies  occur  in  the  supraoculars: 
one  has  the  third  left  supraocular  divided,  and  another  has  the  third 
and  fourth  left  supraoculars  fused  into  a  single  scale.  Van  Den- 
burgh gives  the  following  data:  "Scales  around  the  body  are  26  in 
28  specimens,  24  in  three  and  28  in  two."  He  further  notes  that: 
"In  the  largest  specimens  (snout  to  anus  64  mm.)  the  lateral  lines 
have  quite  or  nearly  disappeared,  and  the  temporal  regions  and 
sides  of  the  body  and  neck  are  suffused  with  brick-red."  This  red 
color  is  not  evident  now,  presumably  having  faded  in  the  preserva- 
tives, despite  the  fact  that  the  other  coloration  is  very  bright. 

Remarks.  It  is  rather  futile  to  attempt  to  determine  the  exact 
relation  of  stimsonii  to  Eumeces  elegans,  marginatus  and  latiscuta- 
tus,  as  it  seems  to  have  pretty  much  the  general  characters  of  all. 
The  change  in  the  position  of  the  lateral  stripe,  the  addition  of  the 
sublateral  stripe  in  the  young  and  the  reduction  in  size  all  speak 
of  a  long  era  of  isolation.  The  presence  of  this  species  in  the 
neighboring  islands  of  Iromotijima,  Yonakunijima  and  the  smaller 
neighboring  islands  may  be  postulated,  although  it  may  be  doubted 
that  it  occurs  on  the  islands  of  the  Miyakojima  group.  Stejneger 
(1907)  mentions  specimens  of  "marginatus"  (Hamburg  Mus.  Nos. 
1182  and  1900)  from  Iromotijima.  These  may  be  specimens  of 
stimsonii,  as  is  certainly  the  case  with  another  specimen  from 
Ishigakijima  (U.S.N.M.  No.  34185)  listed  by  Stejneger  as  Eumeces 
marginatus.  Nos.  21223  and  21224  in  the  collection  of  the  American 
Museum  of  Natural  History,  from  the  "Yaeyama"  islands  appear 
to  belong  to  stimsonii.  Both  have  the  sublateral  line,  and  the  lateral 
line  passes  above  the  ear. 

It  is  a  bit  remarkable  that  in  the  28  specimens  examined  only 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  265 

two  were  females.  These  apparently  had  recently  laid  their  eggs. 
One  may  presume  that  most  of  the  females  were  in  burrows  brood- 
ing eggs. 

Distribution.  Known  certainly  only  from  Ishigakijima  of  the 
Vaeyama  group,  Riu  Kill  Islands  (C.A.S.  29,  including  the  type  of 
stimsonii  Thompson  and  ishigakiensis  Van  Denburgh)  (M.C.Z.  1) 
(U.S.N.M.  li  (A.M.N.H.  2)  (Brit.  Mus.  X.H.  2).  (See  Fig.  40  for 
distributional  map.) 

Eu nieces  barbouri  Van  Denburgh 

(Fig.  40,  Distribution) 

SYNONYMY 

1912.  Eumeces  barbouri  Van  Denburgh.  Adv.  Diag.  New  Rept.  Amph.  Loo  Choo  Is., 
privately  printed,  July,  1912  (type  description;  type  locality  Amamioshirna,  Riu  Kiu 
Islands;  type  No.  21545  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.)j  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4), 
III,  1908-1912  (Dec.  12,  1912),  pp.  215,  216  (redescription  of  type);  Barbour,  Occ. 
Papers  Mus.  Zool.  Univ.   Mich.,  N't).   44,  Sept.   12,  1917,  p.   4. 

History.  The  two  specimens  on  which  the  species  was  founded 
were  a  part  of  a  collection  made  by  V.  Kuhne  between  April  20 
and  May  1,  1910.  The  preliminary  diagnosis  was  published  pri- 
vately by  Dr.  John  Van  Denburgh  in  San  Francisco  July  29,  1912 
i see  Barbour,  1917).  Later  in  December  of  the  same  year  a  de- 
tailed description  was  published,  which  is  here  reproduced.  The 
type  is  now  in  the  California  Academy  of  Sciences,  San  Francisco; 
the  paratype  was  presented  to  the  British  Museum  by  J.  C.  Thomp- 
son. As  I  have  been  unable  to  examine  the  type  or  cotype  I  include 
the  description  and  discussion  given  by  Doctor  Van  Denburgh. 

Diagnosis.  ''One  azygous  postmental;  no  patch  of  enlarged  scales  on  back 
of  thigh;  postnasal  present;  posterior  loreal  short,  normally  touching  two 
labials;  fifteen  or  sixteen  plates  under  fourth  toe;  twenty-two  scales  around 
middle  of  body;  young  with  one  median  and  two  lateral  light  lines;  latter 
narrow,  and  separated  by  not  less  than  width  of  two  scales;  lower  lateral  line 
separated  from  fore  limb  by  less  than  the  distance  between  the  lateral  lines, 
and  running  below  the  level  of  top  of  hind  limb  and  top  of  ear." 

Description  of  the  type  (California  Academy  of  Sciences,  No.  21545. 
"Amami  O  shima,  Loo  Choo  Islands,"  Japan;  April  20-30,  1910):  "Similar 
to  E.  liilisrutatus.  Nasal  small,  in  contact  with  rostral,  supranasal,  postnasal, 
and  first  labial  plates.  Anterior  loreal  forming  sutures  with  postnasal,  supra- 
nasal,  prefrontal,  posterior  loreal.  and  second  labial  plates.  Posterior  loreal 
longer  than  high,  in  contact  with  two  (right)  or  three  (left)  labials.  First 
labial  in  contact  with  rostral,  nasal,  postnasal,  and  second  labial.  Frontal  just 
separated  from  frontonasal,  in  contact  with  three  supraoculars  on  each  side. 
Parietals  large,  separated  by  interparietal.  One  left  and  two  right  nuchals. 
Upper  temporal  largest.  Seven  supralabials,  the  seventh  largest.  One  azygous 
postmental.  Scales  smooth,  except  one  behind  each  corner  of  vent;  twenty-two 


266  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

around  middle  of  body;  fifty  in  a  row  from  parietals  to  line  joining  backs  of 
thighs;  two  middorsal  rows  slightly  enlarged.  Median  subcaudal  row  broad. 
No  patch  of  enlarged  scales  on  back  of  thigh.  Fifteen  or  sixteen  scutes  under 
fourth  toe.  Hind  limb  reaching  between  wrist  and  elbow.  Tail  forked  at 
point  of  regrowth. 

"The  color  above  is  nearly  uniform  light  brown,  with  a  few  dark  brown 
spots  at  the  bases  of  the  scales  posteriorly.  A  dark  brown  band  extends  from 
the  temporal  region  to  the  base  of  the  tail,  and  is  edged  above  and  below 
with  lighter  brown  indications  of  the  lateral  light  lines.  The  upper  lateral 
and  middorsal  lines  are  evident  on  the  tail.  The  limbs  are  brown,  the  centers 
of  the  scales  being  lighter.  The  lower  surfaces  are  greenish  white,  clearer 
yellowish  white  on  the  chin,  preanals  and  midcaudals. 

"A  young  specimen  is  black  above  with  two  narrow  lateral  pale  blue  lines 
on  each  side,  and  a  broader  middorsal  line  which  bifurcates  on  the  head  as 
in  other  species  of  the  group.    The  tail  is  very  bright  blue. 

Length  to  anus 66  49  mm. 

Length  of  tail 90  mm. 

Snout  to   ear 13  10  mm. 

Snout  to  fore  limb 22  28  mm. 

Fore  limb   19  15  mm. 

Hind  limb  28  22  mm. 

Base  of  fifth  to  end  of  fourth  toe 12  10  mm. 

Variation.  "The  smaller  specimen  differs  from  the  type  in  having  the 
frontal  in  contact  with  the  frontonasal,  the  second  loreal  touching  only  two 
labials  on  each  side,  the  superposition  of  the  first  loreal,  the  presence  of  two 
nuchals  on  each  side,  and  sixteen  plates  under  each  fourth  toe.  The  scale 
counts  around  the  body  and  along  the  back  arc  twenty-two  and  fifty." 

Remarks.  "This  lizard  must  be  rather  rare;  for  of  eighty-one  specimens  of 
this  genus  taken  on  Amami  Oshima  only  two  are  of  this  species,  the  others 
being  Eumeces  marginatus.  Eumeces  barbouri  is  practically  a  Eumeces  latis- 
cutatus  with  the  scales  around  the  middle  of  the  body  reduced  in  number 
to  twenty-two. 

"The  presence  in  the  Loo  Choo  Islands  of  a  close  relative  of  Eumeces 
latiscutatus  is  one  of  the  most  interesting  facts  brought  out  by  these  collec- 
tions, since  it  affords,  as  I  believe,  the  first  definite  evidence  of  a  former 
land-connection  between  these  islands  and  Japan  proper. 

"It  is  a  pleasure  to  name  this  lizard  in  honor  of  Mr.  Thomas  Barbour  of 
Harvard  University." 

The  extremely  low  scale  count  on  this  derivative  of  the  Japanese 
latiscutatus  is  surprising,  since  the  form  okadae  varies  from  latis- 
cutatus in  a  marked  increase  in  the  number  of  scale  rows.  Whether 
Van  Denburgh  is  justified  in  thinking  that  the  presence  of  this 
species  affords  the  first  definite  evidence  of  a  land  connection  with 
the  mainland  may  be  doubted.  Marginatus  itself  is  a  species  closely 
related  to  latiscutatus  and  its  distribution  might  offer  just  as  con- 
vincing evidence  of  such  a  connection.  The  surprising  fact,  and  the 
one  not  so  easily  accounted  for,  is  the  presence  of  two  such  deriva- 
tives on  a  small  island.    The  fact  that  so  large  a  series  of  the  mar- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  2(>7 

ginatus  form  was  obtained  (79  specimens)  and  such  a  small  one  of 
barbouri  (2  specimens  i,  suggests  a  very  definite  habitat  difference, 
rather  than  rarity  of  the  latter  form. 

Distribution.  Known  only  from  two  specimens  from  Amamio- 
shima.     (See  Fig.  40  for  distributional  map.) 

Eumeces  marginatus  (Hallowell) 

(Plate  18;  Fig.  40) 

SYNONYMY 

-  0.  Plestiodon  marginatus  Hallowell  Proc.  Arad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1860,  p.  492  (type  de- 
scription: type  locality,  Ousirna,  Japan  and  Loo  Choo  Islands;  lectotype  [Stejneger, 
1907],  U.S.N.M.  No.  11713,  "Loo  Choo  Islands"  Okinawajima,  W.  Simpson  Collector). 
1887.  Eumeces  marginatus  Boulenger.  Cat.  Lizards  Brit.  Mus.  Ill,  1887.  p.  371  (part.) 
(.Vara");  Okada,  Cat.  Vert.  Anim.  Japan,  1891,  p.  70  (part.);  Boulenger,  Ann.  Mag. 
Nat.  Hist..  (6),  X.  Oct.,  1892,  p.  302  (Okinawa);  Fritze,  Zool.  Jahrb.,  Syst.,  VII,  1894, 
p.  860  (part.)  (Okinawa);  Boettger,  Jahrb.  Offenb.  Ver.  fiir  Naturk.,  1895,  p.  115 
(part.)  (Okinawa);  Brown,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  Apr.,  1902,  p.  185  (Okinawa); 
Stejneger,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  58,  1907,  pp.  205-207,  fig.  184  (head)  (part.)  (de- 
tailed discussion  of  types  and  a  careful  description);  Barbour,  Proc.  N.  Eng.  Zool. 
Club,  IV,  Nov.  -24.  1009.  p.  63  (Okinawa);  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci., 
(4).  III.  (190S-'13),  Dec.  16,  1912,  pp.  216-217  (Okinawa):  Terentjev,  Copeia,  No. 
119,   1923,  p.  76   (discredits  records  of  the  species  from  the  Asiatic  mainland). 

History.  The  first  specimens  of  this  island  species  were  included 
in  the  collections  of  Dr.  W.  Stimpson,  the  naturalist  of  the  Rodgers 
North  Pacific  Exploring  Expedition.  These  specimens  were  studied 
by  Dr.  Edward  Hallowell,  who  (according  to  Stejneger,  1907,  p. 
xviii)  died  before  the  paper  was  published.  He  mentions  two 
cotypes,  one  from  "Ousima,"  Japan  (—  Amamioshima),  and  one 
from  Loo  Choo  Island  (=  Okinawajima).  Stejneger  (1907)  states 
that  the  larger  of  the  two  specimens  from  "Ousima"  is  lost.  He 
therefore  designated  the  smaller  Loo  Choo  specimen,  now  U.S.N.M. 
No.  11713,  as  the  type  (lectotype). 

When  examining  specimens  in  the  Philadelphia  Academy  of 
Sciences  in  1933,  I  discovered  a  specimen  of  a  skink  belonging  to 
the  marginatus  section  of  the  Fasciatus  group,  in  a  bottle,  labeled 
"Eumeces  fasciatus."  The  container,  however,  had  a  label  which 
showed  the  specimen  to  be  from  the  Rodgers  North  Pacific  Ex- 
ploring Expedition,  and  is,  I  believe,  the  missing  cotype.* 

Boulenger  (1887)  considered  the  island  forms  from  the  Riu  Kius 
and  those  from  the  large  islands  of  Japan  to  be  conspecific,  as  did 
Okada  (1891)  and  Boettger  (1893).  Stejneger  (1907)  clearly  de- 
fined and  limited  latiscutatus  (Hallowell)  to  the  Islands  of  Japan 
proper,  and  restricted  the  name  marginatus  to  the  species  occurring 

*  The  specimen  is  A.N.S.P.  No.  9309.  The  measurements  are:  head  and  body,  92  mm.; 
tail.  74  mm.;  axilla  to  groin,  49  mm.;  snout  to  foreleg,  21  mm.;  snout  to  ear,  23  mm.; 
head  width,  20.2  mm.;  head  length.  21.1  mm.;  foreleg,  25  mm.;  hind  leg,  35  mm.  This 
specimen  must  be  considered  now  as  belonging  to  oshimensis  Thompson. 


268  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

in  the  Riu  Kius,  believing  it  to  occur  throughout  the  group,  mention- 
ing specimens  from  Ishigakijima  and  Irornotijima. 

Van  Denburgh  (1912,  1912a)  has  essayed  to  break  up  the  Riu 
Kiu  species  into  several  forms.  The  southern  specimens  he  named 
ishigakiensis,  while  those  of  the  islands  to  the  north  of  Okinawa, 
he  named  amamiensis  and  kikaigensis,  from  their  island  habitats. 
Thompson  (1912),  anticipating  the  change,  likewise  described  the 
two  latter  forms  as  E.  oshimensis. 

One  report  of  the  species  from  the  mainland  on  the  Ussuri  coast 
by  Elpatjewsky  and  Sabanejew  has  been  discredited  by  Terentjev 
(1923). 

Diagyiosis.  A  typical  member  of  the  Fasciatus  group;  five  light 
lines  present,  the  median  bifurcating  on  the  nuchal,  the  branches  re- 
uniting on  the  snout;  the  dorsolateral  light  line  arises  on  the  first 
superciliary,  follows  usually  middle  of  the  third  scale  row  to  middle 
of  the  tail ;  the  lateral  light  line  broken  on  labials,  passes  back  from 
middle  of  ear  and  follows  usually  the  sixth  scale  row.  No  sublateral 
light  line.  Median  dorsal  scale  rows  distinctly  widened ;  no  distinct 
patch  of  differentiated  postfemoral  scales;  a  keeled  lateral  postanal 
scale;  subcaudals  widened;  no  postnasal;  a  single  postmental;  scale 
rows,  26.  Limbs  long,  overlapping  when  adpressed.  Adult  males 
lose  practically  all  trace  of  white  lines.  The  markings  and  color 
of  young  similar,  save  the  tail  is  a  bright  blue. 

Description  of  species  (from  topotypes).  Portion  of  rostral  visi- 
ble above  usually  between  one  half  and  three  fourths  the  size  of 
the  frontonasal;  supranasals  relatively  large,  forming  a  median 
suture,  always  separating  the  rostral  from  frontonasal;  latter  scale 
somewhat  variable,  usually  about  as  long  as  wide,  in  contact  with 
the  frontal  in  practically  all  cases  (one  exception  in  30),  the  suture 
often  broad;  prefrontals  variable,  usually  relatively  small,  often  of 
equal  or  smaller  size  than  the  supranasals,  their  sutures  with 
frontonasal  longest,  the  sutures  with  the  other  scales  subequal,  that 
with  frontal  variable;  frontal  slender,  frequently  (if  not  usually  I 
more  narrow  than  the  supraocular  region  in  its  widest  part,  and 
distinctly  longer  than  its  distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout; 
frontoparietals  always  longer  and  larger  than  the  prefrontals,  al- 
ways forming  a  median  suture;  interparietal  always  in  contact  with 
the  nuchal;  parietals  relatively  slender;  normally  only  a  single  pair 
of  nuchals,  but  frequently  there  may  be  two  on  one  side,  one  on  the 
other,  rarely  two  complete  pairs. 

Nasal  moderate,  apparently  only  partially  divided  by  a  suture; 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  269 

anterior  loreal  little  higher  than  the  posterior,  which  is  much  longer 
than  high,  in  contact,  normally,  with  three  labials;  four  supra- 
oculars, three  broadly  in  contact  with  the  frontal;  seven  to  nine 
superciliaries  (eight  usually),  the  anterior  more  than  double  the 
size  of  the  posterior;  a  small  preocular,  followed  by  a  smaller  scale 
and  one  or  two  granules;  two  small,  elongate  postoculars;  median 
palpebral  scales  touching  the  superciliaries;  enlarged  scales  on  lower 
eyelid  separated  from  the  subocular  by  one  or  two  rows  of  granules; 
two  presuboculars ;  four  or  five  postsuboculars  (very  rarely  three); 
anterior  temporal  usually  rather  large,  in  contact  with  both  second- 
ary temporals;  upper  secondary  large,  triangular,  or  fan-shaped, 
definitely  emarginate  posteriorly,  usually  followed  by  three  moder- 
ately well-defined,  vertically  elongate  scales,  one  following  the 
other,  which  are  bordered  above  by  two  scales  posterior  to  the 
outer  part  of  the  nuchal,  the  second  of  these  largest  (in  adult  males 
these  -rales  become  thickened  as  do  the  other  head  scales.  This 
pattern  of  posttemporal  scales  only  a  little  less  distinct  than  that  of 
E.  elegans)  ;  lower  secondary  temporal  narrow,  elongate,  somewhat 
rounded  posteriorly  (broken  in  two  cases*  ;  tertiary  temporal  small, 
not  well  differentiated.  Seven  upper  labials,  the  seventh  largest. 
but  not  relatively  as  large  as  the  same  scale  in  elegans,  and  con- 
sequently the  difference  in  size  between  the  sixth  and  seventh  labials 
is  not  so  great;  the  first  labial  is  usually  higher  and  larger  than  the 
three  following;  a  pair  of  post  labials,  superimposed,  the  lower 
largest,  usually  in  contact  with  ear,  the  upper  sometimes  separated 
by  one  or  two  very  small  scales;  two  or  three  small  auricular 
lobules;  ear  surrounded  by  19  or  20  scales;  usually  six  lower 
labials;  mental  rather  large,  the  labial  border  much  greater  than 
that  of  rostral;  usually  a  single  postmental;  three  pairs  of  chin- 
shields,  followed  by  an  elongate  postgenial,  which  is  bordered  in- 
ternally by  a  scale  longer  than  wide. 

Scales  on  body  parallel,  the  median  dorsal  series  usually  a  little 
wider  than  the  two  adjoining,  those  in  posterior  half  of  body  some- 
times only  as  large  as  the  adjoining  rows;  scales  in  a  row  from 
parietals  to  a  point  above  anus  from  55  to  60,  the  usual  numbers 
being  56  or  58;  scales  about  neck  behind  ear,  34  to  36;  constricted 
part  of  neck,  29  to  32;  in  axillary  region,  36-38;  about  middle  of 
body,  26  (one  25;  one  28).  The  pits  on  the  scales  are  usually  pres- 
ent over  the  usual  lateral  areas;  about  arm  and  leg  insertion  and  in 
posthumeral  and  postfemoral  regions  the  pits  are  more  numerous. 
Subcaudals  wide,  about  98  to  tip  of  tail,  when  complete;  a  well- 


270  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

defined,  keeled,  lateral,  postanal  scute,  less  distinct  in  females;  the 
postfemoral  scales  frequently  show  some  irregularity  and  enlarge- 
ment suggestive  of  the  postfemoral  patch  of  scales  in  Eumeces 
elegans;  about  14  scales  about  insertion  of  arm;  outer  wrist  tubercle 
usually  not  strongly  differentiated,  represented  by  three  or  four 
small  tubercular  scales;  palm  with  five  or  six  scattered  enlarged 
tubercles;  basal  lamellae  of  digits  usually  somewhat  enlarged; 
lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  7;  10;  12;  12;  8.  About  19  scales 
around  insertion  of  hind  limb;  four  large,  paired,  padlike,  heel  tuber- 
cles separated  medially  by  small  scales;  none  or  at  most  only  one 
larger  tubercle  on  sole.  Terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about 
toes;  intercalated  series  of  scales  on  outer  side  of  fourth  toe  usu- 
ally does  not  extend  beyond  basal  phalanx.  Limbs  strong,  well- 
developed,  overlapping,  when  adpressed,  about  the  length  of  the 
fourth  toe. 

Color.  Young  brownish  or  olive-black,  with  a  median  bluish 
white  stripe  from  middle  of  tail  to  first  nuchals,  where  it  bifurcates, 
the  prongs  uniting  on  the  frontonasal  or,  in  slightly  older  specimens, 
terminating  on  the  prefrontals;  dorsolateral  light  stripe  from  first 
superciliary,  following  the  middle  of  the  third  scale  row,  the  outer 
edges  of  adjoining  scale  rows  often  with  minute  bluish-white  flecks; 
the  lateral  line  in  youngest  specimen  available  (50mm.  snout  to 
vent ) ,  shows  four  cream  spots  on  the  posterior  labials  in  front  of 
ear;  it  emerges  from  lower  half  of  the  ear  posteriorly  and  follows  the 
sixth  scale  row  or  edges  of  the  fifth  and  sixth  to  middle  of  tail;  tails 
blue  in  young. 

Male  specimens  lose  the  median  stripe  when  about  60  mm.  snout 
to  vent ;  the  dorsolateral  lines  are  distinct  and  the  area  between  these 
and  the  lateral  lines  is  a  deep  brown,  while  the  dorsal  surface  is 
olive.  The  heads  are  lighter;  females  of  this  age  retain  the  typical 
lines  and  stripes,  the  lateral  brown  stripe  being  very  distinct.  The 
belly  is  bluish-gray,  but  the  remainder  of  underside  is  cream.  Old 
males  loose  all  trace  of  the  white  lines,  becoming  brownish-olive 
above  with  a  well-defined  brown  lateral  stripe.  The  heads  are 
yellowish  (probably  reddish  in  life).  In  younger  specimens  the 
light  lines  may  have  dark  borders  and  the  olive  color  is  at  first  in 
the  centers  of  the  scales.    Limbs  similarly  colored  above. 

Variation.  Most  of  the  variable  characters  have  been  noted  in 
the  description.  Three  specimens  have  been  found  with  the  post- 
mental  divided  (21221-21223  A.M.N.H.)  ;  a  fourth  is  reported  by 
Brown  (1902),  but  whether  in  this  form  or  in  oshimensis  it  is  im- 
possible to  say,  as  he  does  not  state  the  source  of  the  specimen.    In 


Taylor:    The  Gent  s  Eumeces 


271 


Measurements  of  Eumeces  marginatus  (Hallowell) 


Museum 

Number 

Sex 

\  X  S.P. 
9309 

M  C.Z. 
7409 

d1 

M.C  /. 
7409 

9 

1    S  \\M. 
23893 

( ■  \  s. 

24254 

ci" 

c  \  s 
21639 

CAS 

212."..". 

9 

c  \  s. 
21640 

('  \  S 
21642 

yg- 

Snout  to  vent 

93 

85 

76 

76 

70 

65 

64 

60 

52 

Tail 

79  reg. 
21 

114? 

102 

Snout  to  foreleg.  .  . 

23v 

21 

24 

2.-. 

22  6 

19.8 

20 

18 

Snout  to  eye  

7   ."> 

6.2 

5.3 

5.5 

5.8 

5 

4.6 

4.4 

:<,  5 

Snout  to  ear 

23 

19 

17 

18 

16 

15 

13 

12 

10.2 

Axilla  to  groin.  .  .  . 

49 

44 

43 

40 

37.5 

34 

:?s 

:<2 

26 

Width  of  head  .     . 

20 

15 

14 

14 

12 

115 

9.4 

10 

8 

Length  of  head.  .  .  . 

21 

16 

15.5 

14 

14 

13 

12 

12 

10 

IS 
22 

16 
21 

15 

22 

13 

19 

11.6 
19 

1.". 
17.6 

114 
16.4 

10 

Foreleg 

2o* 

15 

36* 

29 

29 

32 

29 

30 

26 

25 

21 

Longest  'oe 

14 

12 

11 

12 

11 

11 

10 

10 

9 

*  Claw   missing.      All   specimens   from  Okinawa. 


one  specimen,  Xo.  21222  A.M.N.H.,  the  frontonasal  is  fused  with 
the  left  prefrontal.  The  frontonasal  varies  markedly  in  size,  and  as 
it  is  larger  or  smaller,  the  prefrontals  are  smaller  or  larger.  When 
of  small  size  the  frontonasal  loses  contact  with  the  anterior  loreal. 

The  color  variation  already  noted  is  typical.  However,  certain 
males  tend  to  retain  the  median  and  other  light  stripes  until  a 
greater  size  is  reached.  The  old  males  have  reddish  heads.  (One 
female  examined  has  six  eggs,  three  in  each  oviduct.) 

Remarks.  This  form  may  be  distinguished  from  oshimensis  by 
the  widened  median  scales,  the  greater  length  of  the  white  lines  on 
the  tail  (in  oshimensis  they  do  not  extend  one  fourth  the  length; 
in  marginatus,  one  half  to  three  fourths  the  length)  ;  and  by  the 
fact  that  the  dorsolateral  line  passes  along  the  middle  of  the  third 
scale  row  instead  of  along  the  edges  of  the  third  and  fourth.  The 
amount  of  differentiation  between  these  two  forms  is  less  than  be- 
tween marginatus  and  stimsonii. 

Distribution.  Apparently  confined  to  Okinawajima  and  possibly 
also  to  the  near-by  islands,  Iheyajima,  Kumeshima,  Iyeshima  and 
Kerumashima,  although  no  records  are  available  for  any  except  the 
first  mentioned  island.     (See  Fig.  40  for  distributional  map.) 

Locality  records: 

Okinawa:  (U.S.N.M.  7.  including  type;  "Loo  Choo  Island,"  April,  1855,  Cat. 
Xo.  11713;  Dr.  W.  Stimpson  Coll.)  (M.C.Z.  3.  A.  Owston  Coll.)  (A.M.N.H. 
5.  M.  Oshima  Coll.);  Nago  (Brit.  Mus.  4.  "Great  Loo  Choo  Is.."  Hoist 
Coll.)    (Fritze.  1894)    (Brown.  1902)    (C.A.S.  11). 


272  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Eumeces  okadae  (Stejneger) 

(Plate  19,  Figs.   1  and  2;   Fig.  40) 

SYNONYMY 

190U.  Eumeces  latiscutatus  okadae  Stejneger.  Bull.  I".  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  58,  1906,  pp.  200- 
202,  fig.  181  (type  description;  type  Locality  Miyakeshima,  Idzu  Islands,  Japan;  type, 
U.S.N.M.  No.  23891;  also  Niishima);  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  III, 
1908-'13  (Dec.  16,  1912),  p.  214. 

History.  The  first  specimens  of  this'  species  appear  to  have 
been  collected  by  Okada  in  the  Idzu  Islands,  May  3,  1887,  but 
were  not  described  until  1906  when  Stejneger's  monumental  work 
on  Japanese  herpetology  appeared.  Stejneger  had  nine  specimens, 
from  two  of  the  islands,  the  type  being  U.S.N.M.  23891  from 
Miyakeshima.  It  was  named  for  the  collector.  Since  that  time 
apparently  no  further  specimens  have  reached  American  or  Euro- 
pean collections  and  the  only  other  literature  reference  merely  re- 
counts characters  of  a  specimen  from  Niishima,  one  of  the  original 
series  studied  by  Stejneger. 

Diagnosis.  A  species  related  to  Eumeces  latiscutatus,  having  a 
five-lined  pattern,  the  median  not  bifurcating  on  the  head,  the 
pattern  early  becoming  very  dim  or  obsolete.  Scale  rows  about 
middle  of  body,  28;  a  large  postnasal,  which  usually  separates  the 
anterior  loreal  from  the  labials;  postmental  single;  a  keeled  postanal 
scale  in  males,  less  distinct  in  females;  seven,  rarely  eight,  upper 
labials,  median  dorsal  series  somewhat  widened. 

Description  of  the  type  (U.S.N.M.  No.  23891,  Miyakeshima,  Idzu 
Islands,  Japan.  May  3,  1887,  by  N.  Okada).  Rostral  high,  the 
part  visible  above  somewhat  less  than  the  area  of  the  frontonasal; 
supranasals  very  large,  probably  equal  in  area  to  the  prefrontals, 
forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal  as  broad  as  long,  touching 
the  anterior  loreals,  forming  a  broad  suture  with  the  frontal;  pre- 
frontals small,  widely  separated  medially;  frontal  elongate,  longer 
than  its  distance  to  the  end  of  the  snout,  touching  three  supraocu- 
lars; frontoparietals  very  much  larger  than  the  prefrontals,  form- 
ing a  median  suture  less  than  half  their  length;  interparietal  slender, 
not  enclosed  by  the  large  parietals;  one  pair  of  nuchals;  nasal 
moderate;  a  small,  well-defined  postnasal;  anterior  loreal  high, 
much  higher  than  the  posterior,  narrow;  second  short,  only  little 
longer  than  high;  four  supraoculars,  three  touching  frontal;  eight- 
nine  superciliaries,  the  anterior  three  or  more  times  as  large  as  the 
second  or  last;  two  presuboculars,  four-five  postsuboculars;  two 
small  postoculars  and  one  preocular,  with  a  small  scute  above  fol- 
lowed by  a  series  of  granules;  only  four  median  palpebral  scales 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  273 

touching  the  superciliaries ;  five  or  >ix  enlarged  scales  on  the  lower 
eyelid,  these  separated  from  the  subocular  by  three  rows  of  gran- 
ules; primary  temporal  rather  large,  rectangular;  upper  secondary 
very  large,  triangular,  its  posterior  border  sinuous;  the  lower  sec- 
ondary temporal  narrow,  elongate,  the  upper  edge  slightly  curving 
but  nearly  parallel  with  lower  edge,  posterior  edge  slightly  rounded; 
tertiary  temporal  elongate,  separated  from  the  nuchal  by  a  small 
scale;  seven  upper  labials,  the  anterior  slightly  higher  and  equally 
as  large  as.  or  larger  than,  the  three  succeeding  scales;  seventh  labial 
largest,  widely  separated  from  the  upper  secondary  temporal;  two 
superimposed  postlabials;  six  lower  labials;  mental  large,  wide,  its 
labial  border  much  greater  than  that  of  the  rostral;  a  single  post- 
mental,  followed  by  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  last  followed  by 
a  large,  strongly  differentiated  postgenial,  which  is  bordered  on 
anterior  inner  side  by  a  narrow,  elongate  scale;  ear  opening  large, 
surrounded  by  about  21  scales,  the  three  anterior  lobules  very 
minute;  scales  of  the  median  series  of  the  back  slightly  wider  than 
adjoining  scales  and  distinctly  wider  than  the  lateral  series;  56 
scales  from  parietals  to  above  anus;  36  rows  about  neck  behind 
ear;  32  rows  about  narrow  part  of  the  neck;  43  rows  in  the  axillary 
region;  30  scale  rows  about  middle  of  body;  20  rows  about  base  of 
tail.  Tail  regenerated;  median  preanals  very  large,  the  laterals, 
two  or  three  on  each  side,  diminishing  in  size,  the  outer  overlapping 
the  inner;  lateral  postanal  scale  bearing  a  well-developed  keel. 

Well-developed  area  of  axillary  scales,  with  a  few  at  the  upper 
anterior  insertion  of  the  limb;  two  or  three  granular  series  behind 
insertion  of  hind  limb;  about  17  scales  around  insertion  of  forelimb; 
outer  scale  on  the  wrist  rounded,  padlike;  palm  with  a  triangular 
area  of  six  enlarged,  rounded,  padlike  scales,  with  other  smaller 
ones;  basal  lamellae  on  toes  padlike;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  6, 
13;  13;  11;  7.  About  24  scales  around  insertion  of  leg;  heel  with 
several  enlarged  scutes,  only  part  of  which  are  padlike;  two  hundred 
padlike  scales  on  outer  mid-portion  of  sole;  rest  of  sole  covered  with 
small  granules.  Lamellar  formula  for  toes:  7;  12;  16;  19;  12. 
Subcaudals  widened. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  Above  nearly  uniform  dark  olive,  the  head 
very  little  lighter;  a  very  obscure  brown  lateral  band  visible  from 
the  temporal  region  to  groin  along  each  side  and  bordered  above 
by  a  very  slightly  lighter  shade  of  olive  than  back  (visible  only  in 
liquid)  ;  below  grayish,  the  chin,  throat,  underside  of  limbs  lighter, 
nearly  cream;  underside  of  tail  also  light  for  a  part  of  its  length. 

18—1123 


274 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


5-. 

<D 
tl 

<U 

d 


c« 


B 

o 


3 


a 

a 
d 

03 
CD 

a 
>> 

a) 


-3 

d 
a) 


U.S.N.M. 
23896 

yg- 

— i        O 

a  » 

<     x     r^     x     ci     r~     r~     ».o 

co                                       oo                               r- 

t-     ci     o      ci      — i      o     o     o»      >-i      r-      »      s      o 

lOO                     "-HCICO—                     rt         —        Cl-H 

i-^CO 

rig 

p 

iH                                                                               lO 

X        h»      l-       CO       —       3".       CI       05       h       O       X       o       co 

■O          g>                    i-H        CI         CI         — I                     i-H        (N        CN        iH 

<5  r*3 

CD       O 

Tf                                                        LO 

-H        O        CI        — I        CI        o        o 

CI           CO           >-l           i-H           i-H           "H           CI 

t~ 

o 

CO        O                                                           00                     "5 

CO       i-0       CO       '0       1"       CO       CO       -h       X       ci       o> 

■H         C4         CQ         I-l         i-H         I-H         CI          CI          i-H 

hrMit 

Zio'b 

o 

co      3      co      ci      co      co      o      ci      c: 

Cl          *T          i-H         i-H         i-H         ci          CO          H 

Type* 

U.S.N.M. 
23891 

x             ci                                             io      ci 

O       „■„      o      -r      -f      -r      co      -h      co      — i      CT>      —i      o: 

t~         S?                  «        'M        CO        i-H        i-H        h        CI        CI        <-< 

Ip-H 

p 

CS       IO       CO       CI       CI       CI       —I       ci       — 

n-r^-i-H      —      cico-h      — 

e 

3 
0) 

p. 

OJ 

- 
E 

3 

1! 
CO 

*a 

C 

> 

0 
-*J 

-^ 
3 
o 
c 

co 

'3 

03 

> 
o 

3 
O 

CO 

03 
0) 

O 

3 
O 

a 

CO 

a 
"a 
o 
o 

s 

c 

CC 

c 
'3 

ill 
O 

°S 
<5 

> 

-3 
0 

ft 

"3 

+: 

>      -3 
C3 

a 

"3 

X 
i 

OJ 

"o 

w 

c 

£ 

- 

Li 
O 

Ph 

4 

Ji 

T3 
C 

£ 

o 

CO 

OJ 
M 

C 

o 

j: 
X 

e 

CO 

O 

o 

2 


00 

CO 


co 


o 

2 


3    OJ 

_    ^ 

-  CT) 
0  00 


CD 
«  CO 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Ki.mi.cks  275 

Variation.  The  three  specimens  from  the  type  locality  agree  in 
the  absence  of  lines  on  the  hack,  the  presence  of  a  dim,  brown, 
lateral  line  and  the  presence  of  thirty  scale  rows. 

The  specimens  from  the  island  of  Niishima,  Idzu  Islands,  Japan, 
differ  strikingly  in  color  and  markings  and  appear  to  approach 
more  closely  their  large-island  relative,  Eumeces  latiscutatus.  The 
dorsolateral  lines  are  narrower  and  the  median  line  appears  to  stop 
at  the  interparietal,  not  forming  the  typical  bifurcating  line  evident 
in  all  the  young  specimens  of  the  typical  latiscutatus.  (The  young- 
esl  specimen.  42  mm.,  has  only  a  suggestion  of  lines  on  the  snout.) 
The  typical  five  lines  are  retained  quite  clearly  in  a  specimen 
(U.S.N.M.  No.  23895  2  )  79  mm.  snout  to  vent.  In  the  largest  male, 
70  mm.  snout  to  vent,  the  five  lines  are  still  rather  clearly  visible, 
while  the  head  has  become  buff. 

The  postnasal  appears  to  be  normally  present,  and  the  lower  part 
of  the  anterior  loreal  is  missing  or  fused  with  the  postnasal  or  the 
posterior  loreal,  and  only  rarely  is  the  anterior  loreal  in  contact 
with  labials.  In  all  the  Niishima  specimens,  the  anterior  loreal  is 
divided  into  two  regular  scales.  A  second  small  postnasal  is  present 
on  the  left  side  in  No.  36533;  in  No.  23895,  the  anterior  loreal  is 
fused  with  the  prefrontal. 

In  the  specimens  from  Miyakeshima,  the  postnasal  is  typically 
present  in  two  specimens;  in  the  third  it  is  wanting  or  fused  with 
the  lower  half  of  the  anterior  loreal. 

The  normal  number  of  upper  labials  is  seven,  but  one  specimen 
has  eight  on  the  left  side  only.  The  number  of  scale  rows  is  28  in 
five  specimens,  30  in  four.  The  scales  in  a  row  from  parietals  to 
above  anus  vary  between  56  and  58.  The  lower  number  occurs 
three  times,  the  higher  four  times.  The  superciliaries  are  8-8  except 
in  two  specimens,  one  having  7-7,  the  other  8-9.  The  frontonasal 
usually  is  about  as  long  as  broad  or  slightly  broader,  in  contact 
with  the  anterior  loreal.  The  frontonasal  is  in  contact  with  the 
frontal  in  all  specimens  examined.  Three  supraoculars  touch  the 
frontal  in  all  cases.  The  postsuboculars  are  either  four  or  five,  four 
being  of  most  frequent  occurrence.  The  limbs  are  strong,  well- 
developed,  overlapping  widely  when  adpressed  in  all  specimens. 

Remark*.  My  reason  for  recognition  of  this  form  as  a  distinct 
species  from  Eumeces  latiscutatus  is  based  on  the  following  char- 
acter-: an  average  of  3.6  more  scale  rows;  an  average  of  three 
more  scales  in  the  distance  between  parietals  to  a  point  above  ami-; 
the  reduction  of  the  anterior  loreal  to  a  small  scale  widely  separated 


276  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

from  the  labials,  and  the  consequent  increase  in  size  of  the  posterior 
loreal.  The  color  pattern  has  been  modified  and  the  bifurcating 
lines  on  the  head  appear  to  be  wanting  in  the  very  young,  the 
median  line  not  even  reaching  the  nuchals  in  a  specimen  41  mm. 
in  snout  to  vent  measurement. 

That  the  species  is  derived  from  latiscutatus  stock  cannot  be 
doubted,  but  the  period  of  isolation  from  the  mainland  form  appears 
to  have  been  as  long  as  that  which  brought  about  the  related 
species,  marginatus,  in  the  Riu  Kius. 

The  Idzu  archipelago  stretches  to  the  south  of  Honshu,  the 
largest  Japanese  island,  a  distance  of  about  180  miles.  Whether 
the  species  reaches  the  outermost  islands  of  Hachijo,  Awoga  and 
Bayonaise  is  not  known,  but  if  so  it  would  not  be  surprising  to 
find  forms  that  would  warrant  subspecific  designation.  I  have  al- 
ready noted  the  differences  between  specimens  from  Niishima  and 
Miyakeshima. 

Distribution.  Known  only  from  Idzu  archipelago.  (See  Fig.  40 
for  distributional  map.) 

Miyakeshima:    (U.S.N.M.  3,  including  type)  (Science  college  Tokyo  1). 

Niishima:    (U.S.N.M.  4)  (C.A.S.  1). 

Eumeces  latiscutatus  (Hallowell) 

(PI.  21;   Figs.  39,  40) 
SYNONYMY 

1838.  Scincus  quinquelineatus  Schlegel.  Fauna  Japon.,  Rept.,  1838,  pp.  99,  139,  Saurii  et 
Batr.,  pi.   1,  figs.  l-4b  (non-Linnaeus). 

1839.  Plestiodon  quinquelineatus  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  p.  70  (part.); 
Gray,  Cat,  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  1845,  p.  91  (part,);  Bleeker,  Naturk.  Tijdschr.  Nederl. 
Ind.,  XVI,  1858,  p.  204  (Japan). 

1860.  Plestiodon  latiscutatus  Hallowell.  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1860,  p.  496  (type 
description;    type   locality   Simoda,   Japan.    Coll.    Rodgers,   N.    Pacific   Explor.    Exped.). 

1864.  Eumeces  (Plestiodon)  quinquelineatus  var.  Japonicus  Peters.  Mon.  Ber.  Berlin  Acad. 
Wiss.,  1864,  p.  57  (type  description;  type  locality  Nagasaki;  von  Martens  collector); 
Martens,  Preuss.  Exped.  Ost.-Asien,  Zool.,  I,   1876,  p.   376   (Nagasaki). 

1878.  Eumeces  (Plestiodon)  japonicus  Boettger.  Offenb.  Ver.  Naturk.,  17-18  Ber.  Mitth., 
1878,  p.  4  (Japan). 

1879.  Eumeces  japonicus  Bocourt,     Miss.  Sci.   Mexique,  Rept,,  Livr.   6,  1879,  p.   423. 

1880.  Eumeces  quinquelineatus  Hilgendorf.  Sitz.  Ber.  Ges.  Naturf.  Freunde  Berlin,  1880, 
p.   113;   Fritze,  Mitth.  Deutsch.  Ges.  Ost.-Asiens,  V,   1891,  p.  299  (Yezo). 

1887.  Eumeces  marginatus  Boulenger.  Cat.  Liz.  Brit,  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  371  (part.) 
(description;  "Miyanoschita"  and  Nikko)  (non  Hallowell);  Okada,  Cat.  Vert.  Jap., 
1891,  p.  70  (part.)  (Tokyo,  Hakone,  Nikko,  Aevaji,  Surva.);  Boettger,  Kat.  Rept. 
Mus.  Senckenb.,  1,  1893,  p.  Ill  (part.)  (Nikko,  Yezo);  Fritze,  Zool.  Jahrb.  Syst., 
VII,  1894,  p.  860  (part.)  (Hondo;   Yezo.). 

1907.  Eumeces  latiscutatus  Stejneger.  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat,  Mus.,  58,  pp.  195-200,  1907,  pi. 
XV,  figs.  1,  2,  3,  and  text  figs.  179,  180;  Barbour,  Proc.  N.  England  Zool.  Club.  IV, 
Nov.  24,  1909,  p.  63  (Yokohama);  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  III, 
1908-'13,  (1912),  pp.  213,  214  (Kobe  Hondo,  and  Kagoshima,  Kinsin) ;  Hatta,  Zool. 
Anz.,  XLIII,  Nov.  4,  1913,  p.  32  (Hokkaido);  Terentjev,  Copeia,  June  16,  1930,  No. 
119,   p.    76;    Nikolski,    Faun.    Ross.,   Petrograd,    I,    1915,    p.    508    (doubts   identification 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  277 

of  lizards  collected  at  Imperator  on  mainland);  Pavlov,  Pub.  Musee  Hoang  ho  Pai  ho, 
\       12,  1932,  p.  8  (Kanson,  Koankia  ho;   doubtful). 
?1931.    Eumeces    latisculatus    (sic)    Tchang.      Bull.    Fan    Mem.    Inst.    Biol.,    II,    Dec,    1931, 
pp.  271,  275  (reports  from  Peiping;   apparently  wrung  locality  data  or  error  of  identi- 
fication). 

History.  The  collections  made  in  Japan  by  Buerger  and  Von 
Siebold  reached  the  Leiden  Museum,  and  furnished  the  material 
upon  which  Schlegel  and  Temminck  based  their  Fauna  Japonica. 
The  specimens  of  this  >ihth>s  were  regarded  as  identical  with 
Linnaeus'  Lacerta  quinquelineata.  Schlegel  writes,  after  compar- 
ing these  with  specimens  of  a  skink  from  Tennessee:  "L'examen 
dun  si  grande  nombre  d'individus  m'a  demontre  qu'il  n'existe  pas  la 
moindre  difference  entre  ces  animaux,  recueillis  sur  cleux  points 
du  globe  assez  distants,  Tun  de  l'autre  quoique  situes  a-peu-pres 
sous  le  meme  parallele." 

Schlegel's  account  contains  considerable  detail  regarding  the 
color  evolution  from  juveniles  to  old  adults,  together  with  data 
on  habits  and  habitats.  He  gives  the  Japanese  name,  awo-to  kague. 
Subsequent  accounts  persisted  in  referring  the  Japanese  skink  to 
the  American  species  until  1860,  when  Hallowell  discussed  this 
matter  after  examining  specimens  brought  back  by  the  Rodger's 
North  Pacific  Exploring  Expedition.  He  concluded  that  the  Japa- 
nese form  was  different  and  proposed  the  name  Plestiodon  lati- 
scutatus. 

Peters,  in  1865,  apparently  independently  arrived  at  this  same 
conclusion  and  suggested  the  varietal  name  japonicus,  after  an  ex- 
amination of  specimens  brought  from  Japan  by  Doctor  von  Martens. 
No  further  account  of  particular  import  was  made  until  that  of 
Boulenger  (1887)  when  he  united  Hallowell's  latiscutatus,  and 
marginatus  under  the  latter  name.  In  1906  Stejneger,  in  his  mono- 
graph on  the  Herpetology  of  Japan,  reviewed  the  literature,  and 
again  separated  the  two  forms.  With  the  aid  of  Dr.  W.  Stimpson's 
field  catalogue  he  fixes  the  type  locality  as  Simoda,  Japan.  Stej- 
neger pointed  out  the  salient  characters  which  separate  the  Asiatic 
from  the  American  forms,  and  commented  on  the  value  of  the 
temporals  as  diagnostic  characters. 

Certain  records  report  the  occurrence  of  this  species  on  the 
Asiatic  mainland,  but  doubt  has  been  cast  on  these  records,  by 
Nikolski  (1915)  and  Stejneger  (1907).  Recently  Terentjev  (1923) 
examined  presumed  Asiatic  specimens  in  the  Zoological  Museum  of 
Moscow,  and  pronounced  them  as  being  latiscutatus.  Stejneger 
(1926)    still  questions  the  identification,  offering  as  a  suggestion 


278  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

that  the  specimens  are  in  reality  E.  pekinensis  (=xanthi) ,  which  is 
the  most  northern  of  the  five-lined  skinks  known  to  occur  on  the 
mainland,  but  admitting  the  possibility  of  accidental  introduction. 

Diagnosis.  A  medium-sized  species  of  the  Fasciatus  group,  hav- 
ing in  the  young  a  typical  black  ground  color  with  a  narrow  median 
white  line  extending  from  the  proximal  half  of  the  tail  to  the 
interparietal,  where  it  bifurcates,  the  branches  running  forward  and 
reuniting  on  the  frontonasal  or  supranasals.  Dorsolateral  line  from 
first  supraocular  to  midway  of  the  tail,  following  the  middle  of  the 
third  scale  row;  labials  spotted;  a  lateral  line  from  the  middle  of 
the  ear  to  tail,  along  the  sixth  scale  row.  Tail  blue.  Adult  males 
become  olive,  losing  stripes.  Normally  a  single  postmental;  a 
postnasal;  upper  secondary  temporal  largest,  wedge-shaped,  emar- 
ginate  behind;  lower  secondary  narrow,  elongate,  the  sides  often 
nearly  parallel.    Normally  24  or  26  scale  rows  about  the  body. 

Description.  A  medium-sized  species.  The  part  of  the  rostral 
appearing  above  smaller  than  the  frontonasal,  rarely  equal;  supra- 
nasals smaller  than  the  prefrontals,  in  contact  normally  (one  ex- 
ception with  a  small  intercalated  scale  between  them),  usually 
smaller  than  the  prefrontals ;  frontonasal  somewhat  variable  in  size, 
in  contact  with  or  separated  from  the  frontal,  normally  in  contact 
with  the  loreal  (rarely  not) ;  prefrontals  somewhat  variable  in  size, 
in  contact  or  separated;  frontal  normally  distinctly  longer  than  its 
distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  in  contact  with  three  supra- 
oculars; four  supraoculars;  frontoparietals  larger  than  the  pre- 
frontals, in  contact  medially;  interparietal  moderate,  sometimes 
approaching  the  area  of  a  frontoparietal;  usually  a  single  pair  of 
nuchals  (rarely  more)  ;  nasal  moderate,  apparently  divided  by  a 
suture;  a  postnasal  normally  present  (very  rarely  absent),  small  or 
larger,  very  often  so  large  as  to  separate  the  anterior  loreal  from 
the  labials  (or  may  be  regarded  as  absent  and  the  anterior  loreal 
split  transversely) ;  anterior  loreal  frequently  small,  and  separated 
widely  from  the  labials,  or  touching  the  labials,  much  higher  than 
wide,  very  much  higher  than  posterior  loreal,  which  is  usually 
relatively  short  in  proportion  to  its  width  and  in  contact  with  two 
upper  labials;  eight  or  nine  superciliaries,  the  anterior  more  than 
double  the  size  of  the  most  posterior;  a  very  small  preocular,  fol- 
lowed by  two  or  three  granules;  two  small  postoculars;  median 
palpebral  scales  in  contact  with  the  superciliaries;  lower  eyelid 
with  enlarged  scales  separated  from  the  subocular  by  three  rows  of 
granules. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


279 


Two  presuboculars,  and  tour  (normally)  postsuboculars ;  primary 
temporal  relatively  large,  often  approaching  area  of  lower  secondary, 
which  is  elongate,  somewhat  wider  posteriorly  than  anteriorly,  or 
the  upper  and  lower  side  approaching  a  parallel;  upper  secondary 
very  large,  wedge-shaped,  slightly  emarginate  behind;  tertiary 
temporal  usually  small,  poorly  differentiated;  scales  following  the 
superior  secondary  temporal  and  nuchals  are  not  strongly  differ- 
entiated in  males  as  in  the  Riu  Kiu  island  forms,  but  approach  the 
same  general  relationship.  Upper  labials  normally  seven,  the  last 
greatly  enlarged,  the  first  usually  scarcely  larger  than  the  three 
succeeding  scales;  a  pair  of  postlabials,  superimposed,  separate  the 
seventh  labial  from  the  auricular  opening;  two  or  three  auricular 


Fig.   39.   Eumeces  latkcutatus  (Hallowell).    Stanford  U.  No.  5629;  Waka- 
rnura.  Japan.    A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head. 

lobules,  small,  inconspicuous;  mental  with  a  slightly  longer  labial 
border  than  the  rostral;  one  postmental;  three  pairs  of  chinshields; 
a  long  postgenial  bordered  internally  by  scales  longer  than  wide; 
usually  six  lower  labials;  18  to  20  scales  about  ear;  scale  rows  on 
sides  parallel,  the  median  dorsal  rows  slightly  wider  (rarely  very 
distinctly  wider)  than  the  adjoining  rows;  scales  around  neck  be- 
hind ear,  about  30;  about  constricted  portion  of  neck,  26-29;  in 
axillary  region,  35-39;  about  middle  of  body,  26-28;  scales  from 
parietals  to  above  anus,  53-57.  Pits  present  on  part  of  lateral  scales, 
growing  dim  or  obsolete  in  adults.  Subcaudals  widened;  usually 
six  preanals,  the  median  pair  much  enlarged,  the  lateral  diminishing 
in  size,  the  outer  scales  overlapping  inner;  a  well-differentiated, 
lateral,  keeled,  postanal  scute;  a  few  granular  scales  in  axilla,  none 
or  but  a  single  row  posterior  to  the  insertion  of  femur. 


280 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


About  fourteen  scales  around  insertion  of  forearm;  usually  two, 
occasionally  three,  outer  wrist  tubercles;  five  or  six  large  padlike 
tubercles  on  the  palm.  Lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  6;  8;  10, 
11;  8.  The  basal  lamellae  of  toes  usually  enlarged.  About  18 
scales  around  insertion  of  the  hind  limb;  usually  two  pairs  of  pad- 
like heel  plates,  separated  medially;  sole  usually  with  only  one  or 
two  larger  tubercular  scales;  lamellar  formula  for  toes:  6;  9;  14; 
17;  11.  Intercalated  row  of  scales  on  fourth  toe  not  extending  half 
way  on  the  basal  phalanx;  terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound 
about  claw. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  Young,  black  or  brownish-black,  with  five 
longitudinal  white  lines  (see  diagnosis  for  detail).  This  coloration 
in  males  grows  lighter  brown  or  olive,  and  the  lines  gradually  dis- 
appear, the  area  between  the  dorsolateral  and  the  lateral  lines  be- 
coming a  deep  brown,  forming  a  conspicuous  lateral  stripe.  Adult 
males  may  be  nearly  uniform  brown  or  olive  above  and  the  lateral 
dark  stripe  remains  distinct.  The  heads  widen  and  the  color  is 
yellow-brown  (reddish-brown  in  life).  Females  tend  to  retain  the 
general  pattern  of  juvenile  coloration,  save  that  the  ground  color 
becomes  lighter,  usually  brownish,  or  olive,  with  darker  edges  on 
the  scales;  the  blue  of  the  tail  is  lost  early. 

Variation.  As  is  typical  of  members  of  the  genus,  certain  char- 
acters are  variable.  Thus,  the  interparietals  vary  in  size  in  propor- 
tion to  the  variation  in  size  of  the  frontonasal.     When  large,  the 


Measurements  of  Eumeces  latiscutatus  (Hallowell) 

Museum 

Number* 

C.A.S. 
33032 

C.A.S. 

33048 

d1 

C.A.S. 
26133 

9 

C.A.S. 

24274 
<? 

C.A.S. 

24276 

C.A.S. 
35929 

d" 

C.A.S. 

24275 

9 

C.A.S. 
33050 

yg. 

C.A.S. 
35921 

yg- 

C.A.S. 
26128 

Sex 

Snout  to  vent 

80 

76 

73 

72 

65 

62 

59 

50 

46 

32 

Tail 

reg. 
25 

125 
22 

20.4 

98 
19.8 

80 
17.6 

78 
16 

57 

Snout  to  foreleg 

24 

23 

25 

13 

Snout  to  eye 

6.3 
17 
42 

6 
17 
40 

5 
13 

42.4 

5.6 
15 
38 

5 
14 
36 

4.9 
14 
33 

4.5 
11 
35 

4.2 
12 
25 

4 

11 
20 

3 

8.2 

16 

Width  of  head 

14 

13 

10.4 

12 

11 

11 

S 

8 

7 

5.5 

Length  of  head 

16 

15.8 

13.3 

15 

14 

13 

11 

9 

8.5 

7.3 

23.5 
31 

21 
31 

19 
27 

21 

28 

20 
27 

20 

28 

17 
25 

15.3 
20 

15 

18 

10 

14 

10.5 

12 

9.6 

11 

11 

10 

8 

7 

6 

*Nos.    24274-21276,    35921,    Kagoshima,    Japan;    33048,    33050,    Miyazo;    33032,    Kobe; 
20133,  2G128,  Ikishima  Is.;  35929,  Sakurajima  Is. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  281 

two  prefrontal  scales  form  a  median  suture.  This  condition  occurs 
32  times  in  50  specimens.  Two  of  these  arc  anomalous,  one  hav- 
ing a  prefrontal  joined  with  the  frontonasal,  the  other  having  the 
frontonasal  segmented,  leaving  a  moiety  inserted  between  the  pre- 
frontals and  leaving  them  in  contact  at  a  single  minute  point.  I 
have  mentioned  above  details  regarding  the  postnasal.  It  would 
appear  that  the  segmentation  of  the  loreal  (the  postnasal  fusing 
with  the  lower  part)  is  most  frequent  in  specimens  from  Hondo. 
In  a  series  from  Kobe,  five  of  the  twelve  have  the  anterior  loreal 
widely  separated  from  the  labials;  a  series  from  Miyazo  has  five 
out  of  six  so  arranged.  Doctor  Stejneger  (1907)  remarks  on  the 
variation  that  occurs  in  a  series  of  specimens  from  Fujiyama  and 
notes  five  lacking  a  postnasal. 

The  usual  number  of  scale  rows  is  26.  I  have  counts  on  68  speci- 
mens. The  number  26  occurs  41  times;  24  occurs  19  times.  Most 
of  the  specimens  having  a  count  of  26,  if  counted  a  few  scales 
farther  forward,  have  28,  those  with  24  may  have  either  26  or  28, 
so  counted.  The  intercalated  axillary  series  should  normally  termi- 
nate before  a  distance  equal  to  the  length  of  the  arm  is  reached. 

Remarks.  The  general  uniformity  of  this  species  and  the  lack 
of  fixed  variation  on  the  several  Japanese  islands  bespeaks  no  great 
degree  of  isolation  as  regards  time;  or,  the  closeness  of  the  various 
islands  still  permits  an  exchange  of  specimens. 

The  species  does  not  appear  to  be  uncommon.  I  have  collected 
it  on  the  hills  about  Nagasaki  and  on  the  road  between  Nagasaki 
and  Moji  on  the  island  of  Kyushu.  Here,  the  lizards  were  seen  in 
considerable  numbers  sunning  themselves  in  bright  sunlight,  which 
had  made  its  appearance  after  a  period  of  four  cold,  rainy  days. 
The  lizards  would  lie  motionless  on  the  rocks  until  one  approached; 
then  they  would  dart  into  a  crevice  in  the  rock  walls.  Being  ill- 
equipped  for  collecting-,  only  a  few  specimens  were  obtained. 

Distribution.  The  species  appears  to  occur  on  the  southern  islands 
Kyushu.  Shukoku  and  Hondo  (at  least  in  the  southern  part  of  the 
latter  island),  with  equal  frequency.  Stejneger  (1907)  has  pointed 
out  the  lack  of  records  from  the  northern  half  of  the  island.  A  few 
records  occur  for  the  island  of  Hokkaido.  The  records  for  the 
Asiatic  mainland  must  be  verified  before  they  are  to  be  accepted. 
Those  of  Hokkaido  are  not  questioned  by  Okada  (1933)  in  his 
distributional  studies  of  Japanese  lizards. 


282 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


40 

*« 

/ 

-— —^^y^    \ 

\ 

\  J^fctf''    \      V^"A      V-A 

30 

1 
1 

1 

jft 

ill  v^vY 

20 

f            \ 

r  «a  ,-^*** 

^   >-\    \^T 

•  /c3ff/5cufafu5 

'              \ 

-A 

t&~  i     i 

▼    oka  dae 

-V 

O  iarioun' 
V  stimsonii 
Q  oshimetnsi-s 

i 

t^^\~"jfts 

10 

"t    \\jL 

A^\  JHf  \ 

J 

Fig.  40.   Distribution  of  island  species  of  the  Fasciatus  group,  in 

Eastern  Asia. 
Locality  records: 

Japan:    (Boettger,  1878)   (U.S.N.M.  5)  (Brit.  Mus.  5)  (A.M.N .H.  2)   (Basle  6). 

Kyushu:  Satsuma  Prow:  Kagoshima  (C.A.S.  7);  Yamagawa  (U.S.N.M. 
6).  Hizen  Prow:  Nagasaki  (Peters,  1865,  type  locality  of  japonicus) 
(Martens,  1876)  (Stanford  1).    Hyuga  Prow:    Miyazaki  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Shikoku:   Tosa  Prow:    Kochi  (U.S.N.M.  9). 

Hondo  (Nippon):  Idzu  Prow:  Simoda  (Hallowed,  1860;  type  locality; 
type  lost).  Kanagawa  Pref.:  Yokohama  (M.C.Z.  2)  (U.S.N.M.  2) 
(Basle  3).  Suruga  Prow:  Mt.  Fujiyama  (U.S.N.M.  21).  Settsu 
Prow:  Kobe  (C.A.S.  12).  Sagami  Prow:  Miya-noshita  (Brit.  Mus. 
6);  Hakone  (Okada.  1891).  Tochigi  Pref.:  Nikko  (Brit.  Mus.  6). 
"Musashi  Tokyo  Fu":  Tokyo  (Okada,  1891).  Kawachi  Prow: 
Kiyotaki  (Stejneger,  1907).  Kii  Prow:  Wakamura  (Stanford  6). 
Osaka  Prow:    Yodo  (Stanford  1). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  283 

Yamato:    Koriyama  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Awaji:   Awaji  Prov.:    (Okada,  1891). 

Hokkaido  (Yczo)  :    (Fritze,  1891)  (Hatta,  1913)  (Boettgcr,  1893)  (Stej- 

neger,  1907). 
Doubtful  Chin,.-,   Records:   (Nikolski,  1915)  (Sun.  1926)  (Gee,  1930) 

(Tchung,  1931)  (Pavlov.  1932)  (Terentjev,  1923). 

BREVILINEATUS  ( tftOUP 

Three  small  species  are  associated  in  this  group.  They  occur  in 
northern  Mexico,  and  in  southern  United  States  in  the  states  of 
Texas,  New  Mexico  and  Arizona. 

The  group  may  be  characterized  as  follows:  skinks  of  medium 
size;  small  median  preanals  overlapped  by  smaller  outer  preanal 
scales;  the  subcaudal  series  only  slightly  widened;  the  median  dor- 
sal white  line  is  either  short  or  long,  bifurcating  on  the  nuchals 
and  extending  a  greater  or  lesser  distance  on  neck  or  completely 
wanting  in  old  adults;  dorsolateral  and  lateral  light  lines  present 
with  a  well-defined  brown  lateral  stripe  between  them,  their  length 
varying  in  the  four  species;  labials  seven;  postmental  one  (rarely 
two  in  tegragrammus)  ;  no  postnasal;  scale  rows  24-28;  interparietal 
enclosed  or  not;  postgenial  bordered  on  its  inner  edge  by  a  scale 
longer  than  wide;  tails  in  young  azure. 

Key  to  the  Species  of  the  Brevilineatus  Group 

A.  Parietals  enclose  the  interparietal;  scale  rows  usually  28;  lateral  brown  stripe  vari- 
able in  width ;  postnasal  variable,  present  or  absent,  usually  absent  in  Arizona 
specimens;  an  elongate  postlabial  follows  the  seventh  labial  which  is  often  no  larger 
than  sixth  labial.      (Arizona,  New   Mexico  and  northwestern   Mexico). 

Etimeces  callicephalus  Bocourt,  p.   290 
AA.    Parietals  not  enclosing  the  interparietal. 

B.  Scale  rows  26-28,  usually  the  first  number  much  more  frequent;  nuchals  two 
(rarely  three) ;  dorsolateral  and  lateral  light  lines  with  lateral  brown  stripe, 
rarely  extending  more  than  a  half  the  length  of  body  and  often  not  this  dis- 
tance ;    median  line  often  scarcely  discernible  behind  the  point   of  bifurcation. 

(Southcin  Texas  and  northern   Mexico) Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope,  p.   283 

BB.  Scale  rows,  usually  28;  nuchals,  usually  three  pairs;  seventh  labial  separated 
from  ear  by  two  postlabials  or  two  superimposed  postlabials ;  bifurcating 
lines  on  the  head  are  never  joined  posteriorly  and  no  median  line  present  in 
young ;  dorsolateral  and  lateral  lines  present,  enclosing  a  broad,  brown  stripe ; 
all  lines  extending  entire  length  of  body;  lines  obscured  in  old  adults. 
(Southern  Texas  and  northeastern  Mexico) .. Eumeces  tetragrammus  (Baird),  p.   298 

Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope 

(Plate  22;    Figs.  41,  42,  43) 

SYNONYMY 

1880.  Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope.  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  17,  1880,  pp.  18-19,  44,  46 
(type  description;  type  locality  Helotes,  Bexar  Co.,  Texas,  G.  W.  Marnock,  collector — ■ 
also,  Fort  Concho,  Texas);  Boulenger,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  376  (Texas); 
and  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London,  1890,  pp.  77,  85;  Cope,  Ann.  Rept.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus., 
1898,  (1900),  pp.  664-665,  fig.  137  (redescription  and  comparison  with  tetragrammus 
and  anthracinus) ;    Brown,   Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,   1903,  p.   553   (range  restricted 


284  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

to  Texas  district) ;  Bailey,  North  Amer.  Fauna,  No.  25,  1905,  p.  45 ;  Streeker,  Proe. 
Biol.  Soc.  Wash.,  XXI,  1908,  p.  169  (Burnet  Co.,  Texas);  and  Baylor  Uni.  Bull., 
XII,  No.  1,  1909,  pp.  5,  6  (Burnet  and  Brewster  counties;  gives  data  on  habits  and 
color);  Ditmars,  The  Reptile  Book,  1915,  p.  200;  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List 
N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  2d  Ed.,  1923,  p.  75;  Streeker,  Cont.  Baylor  Uni.  Mus.,  No.  6, 
1926;  Ortenburger,  Uni.  of  Okla.  Bull.,  Proc.  Okla.  Acad.  Sci.,  Vol.  VI,  pt.  1,  1926, 
p.  95  (Caddo  Co.,  Okla.);  Streeker  and  Williams,  Cont.  Baylor  U.  Mus.,  No.  12,  1927, 
p.  14  (Hays,  Bexar,  Comal,  Kendall,  Burn -t  and  Travis  counties,  Texas);  Streeker, 
Cont.  Baylor  Uni.  Mus.,  No.  16,  1928,  pp.  1-21  (common  name);  idem,  No.  23,  1930, 
pp.  10-11  (Austin,  Texas);  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept., 
1933,  p.  80. 
1917.  Plestiodon  brevilineatus,  Stejneger  and  Barbour.  Cluck  List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept., 
1917,  p.  69;  Streeker,  Bull.  No.  4,  Sci.  Soc.  San  Antonio,  1922,  p.  22  (Bexar  county 
records). 

History.  The  original  discovery  of  this  species  was  made  by 
Mr.  G.  W.  Marnock  at  his  farm  on  the  eastern  edge  of  the  Edwards 
plateau  region,  near  Helotes,  twenty  miles  northwest  of  San  Antonio, 
Tex.  Specimens  were  sent  to  the  National  Museum,  which  Cope 
described  in  1880,  two  of  the  cotypes  being  still  at  the  National 
Museum  (No.  10159)  and  two  in  the  collection  of  the  Academy  of 
Natural  Sciences  of  Philadelphia. 

At  the  time  the  species  was  described  specimens  were  in  the 
National  Museum  from  Fort  Concho  (across  the  river  from  San 
Angelo,  Tex.),  collected  by  Mr.  Boll,  and  these  specimens  were  like- 
wise divided  between  the  two  institutions.  Two  specimens  collected 
by  Geo.  Stolley  were  sent  to  the  Museum  of  Comparative  Zoology  at 
about  this  time. 

Within  the  past  few  years  a  considerable  number  of  specimens 
has  been  collected.  Seven  specimens  from  San  Marcos  and  San 
Antonio  are  in  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History;  eight 
from  Brewster  and  Jeff  Davis  counties  are  at  the  Museum  at  the 
University  of  Michigan;  three  from  various  localities  in  the  Field 
Museum,  Chicago,  and  24  in  the  Kansas  University  Collection 
collected  by  myself  in  various  parts  of  Texas.  The  first  record  for 
a  specimen  collected  in  Mexico  is  one  taken  by  Hobart  Smith  and 
myself  in  Nuevo  Leon  in  1932. 

Since  no  single  type  was  designated  of  the  four  cotypes,  I  shall 
designate  the  specimen  (U.S.N.M.  No.  10159)  measuring  59  mm. 
snout  to  vent,  tail  length  66  mm.  (incomplete)  as  the  lectotype. 
The  types  are  in  fair  condition,  showing  the  typical  coloration,  in 
spite  of  being  somewhat  shrunken. 

Diagnosis.  A  medium-sized  species,  characterized  by  an  olive 
coloration  with  dorsolateral  cream  lines  beginning  on  the  anterior 
supraocular  and  continuing  along  the  third,  and  later  the  fourth 
scale  rows,  a  short  distance  on  the  back;  a  lateral  line  beginning 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eume<  i  - 


285 


near  or  on  the  first  labial  and  passing  along  the  side  of  head  and 
body  a  similar  distance.  On  the  side  of  the  head  and  anterior  part 
of  the  body  is  a  brown  stripe  which  extends  as  far  as  the  cream  lines. 
A  pair  of  curving  lines  begin  on  the  rostral,  and  pass  back  follow- 
ing the  edges  of  the  frontal,  to  unite  on  the  first  nuchal  (or  may 
fail  to  unite  in  older  specimens).  Posterior  to  the  terminations  of 
the  lateral  and  dorsolateral  lines,  the  sides  are  uniformly  of  the  same 
shade  as  the  back.  One  postmental;  no  postnasal;  seven  upper 
labials,  the  sixth  or  seventh  largest  or  of  equal  size;  limbs  touch  in 
young  when  adpressed;  separated  in  adults.  Scale  rows  about  mid- 
dle of  body  26  or  28;  subcaudals  not  or  only  slightly  enlarged; 
median  preanals  relatively  small. 


Fig.  41.  Eumeces  brevMneatus  Cope.  K.U.  No.7744,  topotype;  Helotes, 
Texas.  A,  lateral  view  of  head ;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual  head 
length,  9.4  mm.;  width,- 8.6  mm. 

Description  of  the  species  (drawn  from  topotypes).  Portion  of 
the  rostral  visible  above  equal  to  more  than  half  the  area  of  the 
frontonasal;  supranasals  forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal 
broader  than  long,  touching  the  anterior  loreal;  prefrontals  forming 
a  very  small  median  suture,  and  forming  sutures  with  the  fronto- 
nasal, frontal,  second  loreal,  first  superciliary,  first  supraocular  and 
first  loreal,  the  length  of  the  sutures  in  the  order  named.  Frontal 
angular  anteriorly  (greater  than  a  right  angle),  very  obtusely 
angular  posteriorly  or  slightly  lobulate,  much  longer  than  its  dis- 
tance from  the  end  of  the  snout;  frontoparietals  as  large  as  or 
larger  than  the  prefrontals,  forming  an  elongate  median  suture;  in- 
terparietal in  contact  with  nuchals,  about  size  of  a  frontoparietal. 

Parietals  normal,  the  posterior  and  lateral  edge  curved  or  slightly 
angular,  scales  not  in  contact  with  each  other;  nasal  small,  divided, 


286  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

the  anterior  part  equal  to  posterior  part  with  nostril ;  anterior  loreal 
a  little  higher  than  wide,  very  little  higher  than  the  posterior,  which 
is  longer  than  high ;  a  small  preocular,  followed  by  a  single  small 
scale;  two  small  postoculars ;  two  presuboculars ;  four  supraoculars, 
three  touching  the  frontal ;  seven  or  eight  superciliaries,  the  anterior 
more  than  twice  the  size  of  the  last ;  upper  palpebral  scales  directly 
in  contact  with  the  superciliaries;  four  or  five  elongate,  enlarged 
scales  on  lower  eyelid  separated,  by  two  or  three  rows  of  granular 
scales,  from  the  subocular  labial. 

Primary  temporal  small,  quadrangular  or  somewhat  rectangular, 
in  contact,  sometimes  narrowly,  with  the  lower  secondary;  upper 
elongate,  widened  posteriorly;  tertiary  temporal  small,  separated 
from  the  auricular  opening  by  a  single  scale;  seven  upper  labials, 
the  first  largest  of  those  preceding  the  subocular;  latter  scale  much 
longer  than  high ;  sixth  and  seventh  labials  of  equal  size,  or  seventh 
largest  (rarely  the  sixth)  ;  last  labial  separated  from  the  ear  by  two 
pairs  of  superimposed  postlabial  scales,  occasionally  the  scales  of 
each  pair  fusing  to  form  two  large  scales;  auricular  lobules  small 
but  rather  distinct;  ear  surrounded  by  16-19  scales.  Scale  rows 
about  neck  in  postauricular  region,  30;  constricted  portion  of  neck, 
28;  about  axillary  region,  30-32;  about  middle  of  body,  26  or  28; 
about  base  of  tail,  22.  Subcaudals  small,  only  slightly  enlarged; 
six  preanals,  the  median  pair  largest  but  relatively  small,  the  outer 
scales  overlapping  the  inner.  Limbs  relatively  small,  similar  in 
practically  all  characters  to  tetragrammus  save  that  they  appear  a 
little  less  robust.  The  granular  area  of  scales  in  axilla  likewise 
reduced,  as  in  tetragrammus. 

Subcaudals,  105;  scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus,  56-59.  Other 
characters  not  mentioned  are  as  in  tetragrammus. 

Color  {in  life).  A  well-defined  greenish-olive  (rarely  olive- 
brown)  above,  each  scale  with  a  slightly  darker  indistinct  anterior 
area.  Dorsolateral  and  lateral  lines  as  described  in  the  diagnosis, 
save  that  frequently  the  dorsolateral  line  is  edged  with  dark  brown 
above;  sides  of  head  and  throat  reddish  in  males  during  breeding 
season;  chin,  throat,  breast,  and  underside  of  limbs  cream;  abdomen 
and  lower  surface  of  tail  greenish  or  greenish-blue.  Young  speci- 
mens much  darker,  with  a  brilliant  azure  tail. 

Variation.  Forty-five  specimens  were  studied  in  detail.  Most  of 
the  characters  of  the  head  scales  are  fairly  constant.  The  pre- 
frontals, however,  are  in  contact  in  about  40  percent  of  the  speci- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


287 


o 


s 


a 
B 


o 

— 
03 
- 


I.e. 

t.O 

o5 

3 

l<            CO 

M 

fr- 

01 

- 

to 

r- 

X       i- 

4           -q< 

Mf 

co 

I-H 

f^'u 

5            X 

CI 

ee 

M 

co 

LO 

-      a    CT 

W 

00 

i  * 

— 

to 

i- 

:      ■*      >-o 

;        •*     cs 

pH 

N 

< 

T. 

W 

10 

CM 

co 

IO 

£i 

5             00 

PQ 

3) 

00 

» 

r~ 

X 

<      to      « 

«'£ 

■* 

CI 

^     *— i 

-■'.- 

O 

Cl 

i-O 

5               ■<*< 

1" 

OS 

r~ 

CI 

00 

35 

CO       X       1^ 

MS 

3 

CO 

CM 

CO 

lO 

-^ 

1 

T 

o 

„ 

OT 

00 

CT> 

Ol        l>        l^ 

wS 

o 

CI 

cc 

<       1— 1 

i* 

t^ 

to 

-f 

to 

i        es     o 

Tj- 

— 

0 

JO 

00 

g^ 

-C       X       t^ 

vj- 

— 

cj 

co 

St> 

pi* 

s 

N 

. 

CI 

CI 

■J 

«?5 

;        fc 

■* 

3 

* 

d 

* 

— 

co     x     to 

z^ 

«o 

rH 

~~ 

"              T-H 

«T 

^ 

oo 

— 

- 

CO 

■ci 

«?5 

«> 

x 

o 

t^ 

— 

X 

C^ 

CM       X       to 

*£ 

>            "5 

'"" 

co 

<-H           r-1 

«i 

** 

r^ 

oj      to 

CIQf 

£       M 

-f 

— 

— 

ZQ 

z 

— 

1 

o     to 

fcc 

°       S 

"~ ' 

01 

M 

■> 

«T 

-r 

-r 

- 

^ 

-i 

• 

_ 

_ 

~ 

r~ 

-. 

- 

t^ 

■••- 

r-H 

C*l 

co 

rH 

—  t- 

-- 

T 

m 

N 

c 

CO 

X  '■" 

"2      ■ 

-T 

— 

— 

-.3 

X 

= 

-f 

~ 

to 

£c 

eo 

— 

"' 

co 

™ 

<~ 

00 

CI 

»~ 

• 
so 

-T 

<N 

_ 

X 

d 

,_, 

- 

CM 

X 

'>'  ^ 

to 

— 

C] 

CO 

^ 

i^ 

CN 

Phoc 

• 

5 

_ 

3 

■ 

^_ 

c 

■p 

re 

t' 

i: 

>. 

w 

.5 

*5 

J5 

- 

> 

C 

01 

5 

1 — i 

^_ 

o 

-  * 

-  - 

-  - 

-  — 

o      : 

3 

o 

♦a 

o 

o 

— 

"o 

O 

; 

□Q 

§  = 

3       _' 

a 

3 

cc 

-~ 

*- 

Ti 

1 

"5 

H 

O         - 

o 

o 

o 

.— 

— 

re 

o 

- 

Z 

ta    H 

X 

X 

X 

4* 

£ 

a> 

z 

i 

- 


to 


3 

O 


2 


o    . 
-O 


§  J 


o 


^0 


0J 

0 

a 

tu 

w 

- 

X 

0 

n 

c: 

~ 

- 

'J 

- 

-* 

7t 

to 

r^ 

** 

r^ 

^O 

-. 

-T 

r- 

i- 

m 

Ol 

to  X 

V 

- 

>, 

ot 

*J 

at 

O 

s 

'*-' 

- 

-r 

ltd 

Z. 

u 

IH 

— 

— 

i- 

CC 

w 

9d 

■s 

;. 

CO 

- 

t- 

3 

a) 

H 

a 

_ 

- 

< 

x: 

S 

- 

a> 

z 

C 

■» 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


mens.  The  interparietal  is  never  enclosed.  Four  supraoculars  is 
the  constant  number,  save  in  one  specimen,  which  has  the  fourth 
transversely  split  on  one  side,  making  five;  four  postsuboculars,  save 
in  one  specimen  with  five.  The  scales  about  the  ear  vary  from  14 
to  18;  the  scales  in  a  row  from  occiput  to  above  anus  from  54  to 
60,  57  occurring  in  about  half  of  the  specimens  examined.  Scale 
rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body  are  26-28,  save  in  a  single  speci- 
men from  Fort  Concho,  Tex.,  which  has  only  24.  The  number  26 
occurs  thirty-two  times,  27,  six  times,  28,  six  times.  The  nuchals 
usually  are  two  or  three  pairs,  2-2  occurring  twenty-nine  times; 
2-3  occurring  eleven  times,  2-1  occurring  six  times.     Only  two  of 


Fig.  42.  Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope.  E.H.T.  and  H.M.S.  No.  276; 
near  Sabinas  Hidalgo,  Nuevo  Leon,  Mexico.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B, 
dorsal  view  of  head.    Actual  head  length,  9  mm.;  width,  8  mm. 


the  45  specimens  have  two  postmentals.  The  lamellae  under  the 
fourth  toe  vary  between  13  and  16,  the  number  13  occurring  five 
times,  14,  nineteen  times,  15,  thirty-seven  times,  and  16,  twenty- 
nine  times. 

Remarks.  The  relation  between  brevilineatus  and  tetragrammus 
is  indeed  close.  I  have  retained  the  former  as  a  distinct  species 
because  I  have  found  no  positive  evidence  of  intergradation  be- 
tween the  twyo.  The  color  pattern  is  seemingly  the  only  positive 
character  that  will  separate  them,  since  all  other  characters  seem  to 
break  down  in  large  series.  It  appears  that  ranges  of  the  two  species 
overlap   for  a   known   distance  of   three  hundred  miles,*   another 

*  This  is  true  if  a  specimen  identified  by  Strecker  (1909)  from  Burnet  county  is  actually 
of  this  specirs.  I  have  been  unable  to  examine  this.  There  is  a  probability  that  it  is  actually 
Eumeces  septentrionalis  obtasirostris.  If  this  is  incorrectly  identified,  the  known  overlap  is 
less  than  two  hundred  miles  north  and  south. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


289 


reason  for  maintaining  them  as  distinct  species.  Should  intergrada- 
tion  occur  I  would  expect  it  to  occur  somewhere  in  southern  Nuevo 
Leon. 

The  second  loreal  in  bn  vilineatus  is  usually  longer,  and  the 
frontoparietals  longer  than  in  tetragrammus;  the  legs  average 
slightly  shorter,  proportionally,  to  the  axilla  to  groin  distance. 

This  species  is  apparently  much  less  shy  than  tetragrammus. 
Most  of  the  specimens  1  have  collected  have  been  seen  moving  about 
in  daytime.  At  Helotes  the  specimens  were  usually  seen  along  the 
small  gullies  which  empty  into  Helotes  creek.  They  would  take 
refuge  in  masses  of  leaves  or  brush  and  were  usually  near  pools  of 
water.  At  Alpine,  in  Brewster  county,  they  were  captured  from 
piles  of  rotting  brush  along  the  edge  of  a  tiny  stream  fed  by  a 
spring.  Some  escaped  by  entering  the  water,  diving  and  entering 
piles  of  brush  which  were  in  the  water.  Specimens  captured  near 
Sabinas  Hidalgo  in  Nuevo  Leon  were  in  rotting  piles  of  brush, 
formerly  the  "nests"  of  pack  rats.  At  Somerset,  Atascosa  county, 
Texas,  the  species  was  observed  about  large  plants  of  Opuntia  and 
some  were  captured  with  the  assistance  of  Mr.  A.  J.  Kirn  by  re- 
moving the  large  spreading  cacti  and  digging  about  among  the  roots. 

Distribution.  The  species  occurs  through  southern  Texas  west 
of  97°  east  long.,  and  south  of  31°  30'  north  lat.,  and  through  the 
northern  part  of  Nuevo  Leon,  and  probably  also  Tamaulipas  and 
Coahuila  and  eastern  Chihuahua. 


Fin.  43.   Distribution  of  Eumeces  brevilineatus  Cope,  in  Texas 

and  Mexico. 

19—1123 


290  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

A  single  record  for  Caddo  Co.,  central  southern  Oklahoma,  by 
Ortenburger  (1926)  has  not  been  verified  by  me,  but  it  is  possible 
that  these  records  are  based  on  Eumeces  septentrionalis  obtusirostris 
Bocourt.  Whether  these  specimens  are  lost  or  not  I  cannot  say. 
They  were  evidently  not  in  the  National  Museum  in  August,  1933. 
The  Nuevo  Leon  specimens  were  collected  31  miles  south  of  Sabinas 
Hidalgo  (3  specimens),  and  four  miles  west  of  Sabinas  Hidalgo 
(1  specimen). 

Locality  records: 

Texas  : 

Brewster  Co.:  3  miles  southwest  of  Alpine  (K.U.  5);  Chisos  Mts.  (K.U. 
1);  Glass  Mts.,  5  mi.  north  of  Marathon  (K.  U.  1);  East  Ranger 
Canon,  Alpine  (Cornell  1) ;  Paisano,  5,300  ft.  (Bailey,  1905). 

Jeff  Davis  Co.:   Cherry  Canon,  Davis  Mts.  (Mich.  3)   (M.C.Z.  1). 

Valverde  Co.:  Near  mouth  of  Devils  river  (K.U.  D  ;  10  miles  north 
of  Comstock  (Cornell  1). 

Dimmit  Co.:   Near  Carrizo  Springs  (K.U.  2). 

Atascosa  Co.:   Near  Benton  (K.U.  1). 

Jim  Wells  Co.:   Nueces  river,  near  Casablanca  (K.U.  2). 

Travis  Co.:   Near  Austin  (K.U.  1). 

Bexar  Co.:  Helotes  (U.S.N.M.  2  Cotypes)  (A.N.S.P.  2  Cotypes); 
Helotes,  20  mi.  NW  San  Antonio  (Cornell  6)  (Baylor  6)  (K.U.  2) ; 
Somerset  (K.U.  1);  San  Antonio  (K.U.  1)  (Taylor  Coll.  1);  near 
San  Antonio  (A.M.N.H.  4);  Medina  river,  San  Antonio  (Cornell  1). 

Comal  Co.:   New  Braunfels  (K.U.  2). 

McCulloch  Co.:  Brady  Creek  (Taylor-Smith  2). 

Hays  Co.:  San  Marcos  (A.M.N.H.  4)  (Mich.  1)  (Field  1)  (Baylor  2). 

Kendall  Co.:   Boerne  State  Park  (Cornell  1);  Boerne  (Strecker,  1926). 

Wilson  Co.:  Cibolo  creek  (Baylor  6) ;  C.  A.  Goeth  Ranch  (Baylor  3). 

Tom  Green  Co.:  Fort  Concho  (A.N.S.P.  3). 

McLennan  Co.:    (Field  1) ;  Bluff  creek  (Baylor  10) ;  Tonkaway  creek 
(Baylor  13)  Rock  creek  (Baylor  1). 

Burnet  Co.:  Morgan  creek  (Field  1);  White  Eagle  Copper  Mine  (Bay- 
lor 1). 

Unidentified  locality :   Texas  (M.C.Z.  2). 

Nuevo  Leon:     Four  mi.  west  Sabinas  Hidalgo    (Taylor-Smith   1);   31   miles 
south  of  Sabinas  Hidalgo  (Taylor-Smith  3). 

Eumeces  callicephalus  Bocourt 

(Plate  23;   Figs.  44,  45) 

SYNONYMY 

1879.  Eumeces  cailicephalus  Bocourt.  Miss.  Sci.  Mexique  et  Cent.  Amer.,  Liv.  6,  1879,  pp. 
431-433,  PI.  XXII  D,  figs.  2,  2a,  2b,  2c,  and  PI.  XXII  E,  fig.  2  (type  description; 
type  locality,  Guanajuato,  Mexico,  Duges  Coll.);  Cope,  Proc.  Amer.  Phil.  Soc,  XXII, 
Jan.  to  Oct.,  1885,  p.  170  (Key);  Giinther,  Biol.  Cent.  Amer.,  Rept.,  Batr.,  (1885- 
1902),  1885,  Oct.,  p.  431;  Boulenger,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  378  (Ciudad, 
Forrer  Coll.);  Cope,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  32,  1887,  p.  46;  Cope,  Ann.  Rept, 
U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  1898  (1900),  p.  628  (key);  Taylor,  Uni.  Kansas  Sci.  Bull.,  XIX, 
Nov.,  1929,  pp.  67-69   (Huachuca  Mts.,  Arizona;   first  report  for  U.  S.). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  291 

1882.  Eumeces  fasciatus  (part.)  Yarrow.  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  24,  1882,  p.  12  (speci- 
men from  Gila  river,  Arizona);  Burt,  Occ.  Papers  Mus.  Zool.  Univ.  Michigan,  No. 
201,  1929,  p.   4. 

1897.  Plesthiodon  callicephalum  Duges.  La  Naturaleza,  (2),  II,  1896,  (1897),  pp.  480  and 
l-::. 

?1900.  Eumeces  quinquclineatus  (part.)  Cope.  Ann.  Rept.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  1898  (1900),  p. 
639  (specimens  from  Gila  river,  Arizona,  No.  9231). 

71900.  Eumeces  guttulatus  (part.)  Cope.  Ann.  Rept.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  1898  (1900),  p.  646 
(specimen  from  Gila  river,  Arizona;   No.  0231). 

1922.  Eumeces  obsoletus  (part.)  Van  Denburgh.  Occ.  Papers  California  Acad.  Sci.,  X,  Vol. 
I,  Liz.,   1922,  p.   592   (young  specimens;    Huachuca  Mts.). 

History.  Apparently  the  earliest  specimen  (or  specimens)  of  this 
species  was  collected  by  Dr.  C.  G.  Newberry  in  1873,  along  the 
Gila  river,  Arizona ;  at  least  there  is  a  small  specimen  in  rather  bad 
state  still  listed  under  Cat.  No.  9231  in  the  U.  S.  National  Museum. 
The  original  listing  of  this  number  by  Yarrow  (1882)  gave  three 
specimens,  all  identified  as  Eumeces  fasciatus,  collected  by  Dr.  C. 
G.  Newberry,  Gila  river,  Arizona.  Cope  (1900,  p.  639)  first  lists 
No.  9231  under  Eumeces  quinquelineatus,  "3  spec.  Gila  river,  Ari- 
zona; Dr.  C.  G.  Newberry,  collector,"  and  later  (p.  646)  under 
Eumeces  guttulatus,  "Gila  river  Arizona,  1  spec.  Dr.  C.  G.  New- 
berry, collector."  Burt  (1929)  has  recently  examined  the  (appar- 
ently) sole  remaining  specimen  of  the  original  lot  and  incorrectly 
identified  it  as  Eumeces  fasciatus. 

The  discovery  of  the  type  specimen  of  this  species  was  made  by 
Dr.  Alfredo  Duges  near  Guanajuato,  Mexico,  who  sent  a  specimen 
to  the  Paris  Museum,  prior  to  1879.  It  was  carefully  described  by 
Bocourt  (1879)  in  the  "Mission  Scientifique  au  Mexique."  He  noted 
that  the  species  shows  certain  similarities  to  Eumeces  sumichrasti. 
There  is,  however,  no  close  relationship  between  them,  as  they  be- 
long apparently  to  widely  differing  groups.  Mr.  Forrer  collected  a 
specimen  for  the  British  Museum  in  Ciudad,  Mexico  (presumably 
one  of  three  villages  of  this  name  in  Durango,  rather  than  Sinaloa), 
which  is  described  in  Boulenger's  Catalogue  of  Lizards,  1887.  In 
1928  I  found  and  recognized  the  species  in  the  Huachuca  Mountains 
in  southeastern  Arizona,  and  subsequently  a  specimen,  which  is  now 
in  the  Museum  of  the  University  of  Michigan,  was  collected  there 
by  H.  K.  Gloyd. 

Two  specimens  in  the  California  Academy  of  Sciences  from  the 
Huachuca  Mountains  (mentioned  by  Van  Denburgh,  1922,  as  young 
obsoletus) ;  one  specimen  in  the  Field  Museum,  Chicago,  collected 
at  Tombstone,  Ariz.,  a  specimen  in  the  Harvard  Museum  from 
Madera,  Chihuahua,  Mexico;  and  four  specimens  in  the  Alfredo 
Duges  Museum,  Guanajuato,  represent  the  material  I  have  had 
available  for  study  besides  specimens  collected  by  myself. 


292 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


Diagnosis.  A  medium-sized  species  probably  not  reaching  a  body 
length  greater  than  70  mm.  (largest  specimen  known  65  mm.) ; 
dorsolateral  and  lateral  light  lines  present  which  may  disappear  or 
become  obsolete  before  the  middle  of  the  body  is  reached;  a  short 
median  light  line  forking  on  the  nuchal ;  a  dark,  blackish  or  brown- 
ish lateral  stripe ;  limbs  fail  to  touch  when  adpressed,  even  in  young ; 
scales  from  parietals  to  above  anus,  56  to  59;  scale  rows  on  the 
middle  of  the  body,  28,  rarely  26;  two  postmentals;  postnasal  pre- 
sent or  absent  (usually  absent  in  Arizona  specimens) ;  subcaudals 
very  slightly  widened;  seven  upper  labials,  the  last  largest  or  equal 
to  sixth;  prefrontals  in  contact. 


Fig.  44.  Eumeces  ccdlicephalus  Bocourt.  K.U.  No.  6474,  Ash  Canon, 
Huachuca  Mts.,  Arizona.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of 
head.    Actual  head  length,  10  mm.;  width,  8.5  mm. 


Description  of  the  species.  (From  M.C.Z.  No.  15928,  Madera, 
Chihuahua,  Mexico.)  The  portion  of  the  rostral  visible  above, 
large,  nearly  equal  to  the  area  of  the  frontonasal ;  supranasals  large, 
separating  the  frontonasal  from  the  rostral;  the  frontonasal  hex- 
agonal, somewhat  broader  than  long,  touching  the  anterior  loreal; 
prefrontals  only  slightly  smaller  than  the  frontonasal,  forming  a 
broad  median  suture;  frontal  moderate  in  size,  about  equal  in 
length  to  its  distance  from  the  tip  of  the  snout;  the  sides  very 
straight,  converging  somewhat,  the  anterior  part  forming  an  obtuse 
angle,  the  posterior  a  right  angle  (posterior  tip  of  the  frontal  ab- 
normally segmented  transversely)  ;  frontoparietals  pentagonal,  form- 
ing a  median  suture;  interparietal  small,  broadly  enclosed  behind 
by  the  large  parietals;  two  pairs  of  nuchals,  both  rather  narrow,  but 
transversely  elongate;  nasal  small,  the  nostril  large,  the  anterior 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  293 

part  of  the  scale  much  larger  than  the  posterior  part,  when  postnasal 
is  present;  postnasal  distinct  (absenl  sometimes  in  more  northern 
specimens),  touching  two  labials  and  supranasals;  anterior  loreal 
much  higher  and  narrower  than  the  second,  the  two  forming  equal 
sutures  with  the  prefrontal;  second  loreal  longer  than  high,  touching 
three  (or  two)  labials  below,  separated  from  the  first  supraocular; 
two  presuboculars.  the  upper  largest;  four  supraoculars,  the  two 
anterior  (or  three)  touching  the  frontal;  eight  superciliaries,  the 
anterior  large,  forming  a  suture  with  the  prefrontal  equal  to  that  of 
the  first  supraocular;  one  or  two  small  preoculars  and  two  post- 
oculars;  upper  palpebral  scales  transparent,  in  contact  with  super- 
ciliaries (at  least  five);  enlarged  >eales  on  lower  eyelid  separated 
from  the  subocular  by  twro  or  three  series  of  small  granular  scales; 
four  postsuboculars;  seven  upper  labials,  four  preceding  the  sub- 
ocular  labial,  all  more  or  less  of  equal  height  and  seeming  to  differ 
little  in  size,  the  seventh  larger  than  the  sixth  (frequently  about 
equal) ;  primary  temporal  as  large  as  sixth  labial,  more  or  less 
rectangular,  distinctly  less  than  half  the  size  of  the  elongate  upper 
secondary  temporal  and  also  forming  a  distinct  suture  with  the 
lower  secondary  temporal ;  latter  relatively  large,  as  large  or  larger 
than  seventh  labial,  and  about  one  third  of  its  bulk  extending  be- 
hind the  seventh  labial  (usually  about  one  half  or  two  thirds)  ; 
tertiary  temporal  not  large  or  well  differentiated,  separated  from  the 
auricular  opening  by  a  large  preauricular  scale;  an  elongate  post- 
labial  following  the  seventh  labial,  lies  below  the  lower  secondary 
temporal  and  is  separated  from  ear  by  two  tiny  preauricular  scales; 
two  well-defined  auricular  lobules.  Six  lower  labials,  last  very 
large;  two  postmentals,  the  anterior  small,  touching  only  the  first 
labial;  mental  with  a  much  longer  labial  border  than  the  rostral; 
three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  anterior  pair  in  contact;  the  postgenial 
scale  somewhat  enlarged,  bordered  internally  by  a  narrow,  elongate 
scale. 

The  auricular  opening  moderate,  surrounded  by  about  18  scales; 
32  scales  about  neck  immediately  behind  the  ear;  29  about  con- 
stricted part  of  the  neck;  34  about  body  in  axillary  region;  28  about 
middle  of  body  and  21  about  base  of  tail;  the  dorsal  scales  are  not  or 
but  slightly  larger  than  laterals  and  are  practically  parallel  on  sides 
save  in  axillary  region  and  in  groin.  Scales  on  side  of  neck,  above 
and  behind  insertion  of  the  arm,  on  side  and  in  groin,  with  one  or 
two  small  pits;  on  the  sides  these  are  less  distinct  but  appear  to 
be  absent  elsewhere;  the  preanal  scales  are  relatively  small,  but 


294  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

the  median  pair  distinctly  enlarged,  the  three  on  each  side  smaller; 
the  outer  scales  overlap  inner;  the  median  ventral  subcaudal  scales 
slightly  larger  than  the  adjoining  rows;  those  under  regenerated  part 
of  tail  are,  however,  distinctly  widened;  a  scale  at  the  posterior 
corner  of  anus  is  large  and  shows  a  slight  raised  area  (present  only 
in  males)  ;  a  very  small  group  of  small  scales  in  the  axilla. 

Arm  small;  brought  forward  it  fails  to  reach  eye;  palm  with 
several  enlarged  tubercles  and  a  few  intercalated  smaller  granules; 
a  prominent  tubercle  on  wrist  behind  base  of  the  fifth  finger; 
lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  5;  8;  11;  11;  7;  heel  bordered  by  five 
larger  tubercular  scales;  sole  with  rather  uniformly  small  tubercles, 
a  single  larger  one  posteriorly;  lamellar  formula  for  toes:  6;  10; 
12;  15;  11.    Scales  under  tail,  100. 

Color.  Above,  generally  olive-brown,  the  scales  with  a  more  olive 
center,  the  edges  bordered  with  brown;  a  dim  line  begins  medially 
between  shoulders  and  passes  forward  to  the  nuchals;  here  two 
lines  begin  and  run  forward  along  the  edges  of  the  frontal  and  later 
unite  on  the  rostral;  these  lines  are  very  narrow;  the  dorsolateral 
light  line  begins  on  the  first  superciliary  and  runs  back  across  the 
sides  of  the  neck  and  along  the  sides  where  it  follows  the  inner  half 
of  the  fourth  lateral  scale  row;  it  is  separated  from  its  fellow  by 
six  complete  scale  rows;  it  can  usually  be  traced  dimly  to  the  tail; 
a  light  lateral  line  runs  from  rostral  along  the  upper  edge  of  the 
posterior  labials  to  the  upper  edge  of  the  ear;  below  this  line 
posteriorly,  labials  dark;  the  lateral  line  continues  from  middle  part 
of  the  ear  above  arm  to  groin;  between  the  two  light  lines  is  a  deep 
chocolate  to  blackish-brown  stripe  beginning  on  snout,  passing  back 
to  base  of  the  tail  where  it  ceases;  the  stripe  on  the  side  is  two 
whole-  and  two  half-scale  rows  wide,  narrowing  greatly  above  inser- 
tion of  the  hind  limb;  lower  lips  and  chin,  underside  of  limbs  and 
anal  plates  light  cream  to  white  (alcohol),  while  the  remainder  of 
the  sides  and  belly  is  bluish-gray,  becoming  somewhat  brownish  be- 
low lateral  stripe;  head  dark  brown  and  the  light  lines  on  neck 
bordered  Math  the  same  color.  The  light  lines  on  neck  are  prominent 
but  become  less  prominent  posteriorly. 

Variation.  The  small  number  of  specimens  fail  to  give  any  com- 
plete picture  of  the  variation,  but  the  Arizona  specimens  seem  to 
differ  in  the  absence  usually  of  a  postnasal  (absent  seven  times; 
present  on  both  sides  once;  on  one  side  once,  while  the  three  Mexican 
specimens  have  it  present  on  both  sides ) .  They  differ,  too,  in  having 
a  narrower  lateral  brown  stripe,  one  and  one  half  to  two  scales  wide, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


295 


•- 

^ 

CN 

OC 

X 

11C 

CO 

ijx 

Woe 

oc 

1> 

•IC 

r- 

cc 

1^ 

CN 

ec 

C3 

cn 

r- 

r- 

CN 

•— ' 

D 

j: 

— 

U 

s 

# 

00 

pq 

CN 

1C 

CO 

CO 

0 

•O 

CN 

■t 

ec 

rH 

•-H 

ct> 

0 

rH 

,. 

10 

IC 

■* 

T— 

H 

WS 

ec 

■* 

cc 

ec 

00 

ec 

O 

iC 

X 

*E 

Tf 

CN 

< 

c 

r'S 

LC 

t> 

X 

0 
■+-> 
to     . 

Wee 

C 

t^ 

1- 

t^ 

00 

UC 

CN 

iC 

X 

-£-2 

L- 

•" 

CN 

t^ 

*" ' 

l§ 

t-i  - 

"    CC 

CJ 

cog 

* 

ec 

t> 

rH 

0  = 

1— t  -C 

•  x 

q 

OC 

ec 

t^ 

X 

-X 

CN 

ec 

r.  ^ 

B 

oc 

r- 

CN 

1-1 

^~ 

.«  3 

«w 

t-     - 

■4-3 

■  CT 

CM 

* 

OC 

oc 

r- 

t^ 

X 

c 

CN 

X 

ec 

<2 

■  X 

p 

UC 

OC 

1— 

CN 

•^ 

r-< 

■2 

o 

#^   tft 

O 

RS 

OC 

10 

CN 

IO 

CN 

—  r; 

eg 

OC 

Tf 

c 

CN 

00 

0 

[^ 

CC 

I-- 

c 

■S  a 

o> 

10 

c 

CN 

CC 

rH 

' — 1 

r- 

Cv     -^ 

*— 

~      — 

5s 

-s 

K  5 

C2 

sioc 

t~- 

ecK 

I- 

/ 

CN 

0 

O 

t> 

CC 

X 

c> 

x  5 
■*« 

ir. 

CC 

" 

raU 

CO 

IS 

en 

CO 

oc 

* 
oc 

a 

c 

■* 

0 

0  >> 

X  a> 

E 

s 

E-i 

IC 

t^ 

^H 

»-l 

CN 

§ 

nCh 

<*H 

2c 

KC 

CN 

LC 

<  6 

O 

cc 

r— 

ec 

oc 

c: 

N 

CN 

X 

_  0) 

% 

ec 

O 

cc 

1-1 

c 

S-  3     • 

c  ^  - 

<L> 

<—       — 
-    ^  u 

a 

&'S 

cn 

CN 

CN 

eu   03  •- 

<D 

MS 

■<* 

CN 

ec 

oe 

c 

t> 

LC 

fc* 

ec 

CN 

cc 

CN 

-■-'       Q     ... 

Tfi 

"*   tS 

^o 

LC 

^   ~   G 

ifl 

C 

C 

c 

c 

t~ 

cc 

O 

£ 

ec 

CN 

t 

CN 

«-° 

°J3  » 

—  v.  a 

^<  >■ 

-H 

,.  eo 

rS 

•  >o 

ut-    « 

»HI   O 

2          C 

0  eo  rH 

t,  CO  'V 

c  t^  cc 

~ 

-y-O 

^ 

Jc   : 

4: 

a 

D 

C 

- 

7 

i 

,       s  g  0 

Z 
> 

"a 

u 

! 

i 

[     — 

1— 

1 

c 

a 

c 

ccT 

c 

C 

c 

"e 

c 

■S 

C. 

1     - 

a  r  — 

s  0. 

-*- 

- 

C 
C 

1  j 

D      a 

s 

1           -,"  >-*   V' 

— 

■c 

6 

0      _ 

r      a 

- 

a 

*     H— >th' 

c 

•- 

C 

>     ~ 

C 

&. 

c 

c 

<i 

£ 

£■ 

■; 

A 

.     £ 

1      c 

1      V 

!      < 

K 

< 

0 

E- 

1      c 
<     & 

e 

c 

« 

296  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

with  the  lateral  and  dorsolateral  stripes  missing  from  the  posterior 
part  of  the  body  even  in  young  specimens,  and  the  lines,  where 
present,  wider;  the  frontonasal  is  generally  smaller  and  is  occa- 
sionally (twice)  separated  from  both  anterior  loreals,  and  in  three 
cases  from  one;  in  four  cases  they  touch  on  both  sides  as  in  the 
Mexican  specimen  described. 

Scale  rows  in  middle  of  body  vary  from  26  to  28,  28  appearing  9 
times,  27  once  and  26  twice;  the  number  of  nuchals  is  variable: 
1-1  is  the  typical  number  in  the  northern  specimens,  1-2  and  2-2 
occasionally  occurring.  In  all  specimens  examined,  save  the  one 
described,  the  three  anterior  supraoculars  touch  the  frontal.  The 
parietals  usually  enclose  the  interparietal,  save  in  one  case  a  small 
intercalated  scale  separates  them,  and  in  three  others  the  inter- 
parietal. In  the  younger  specimens  the  adpressed  limbs  are  in 
contact;  in  adults  they  are  narrowly  separated  in  males,  widely  so 
in  females. 

The  distinctness  of  the  lines  in  the  Chihuahua  specimen  here 
described  seems  to  differ  from  the  type  as  well  as  from  Arizona 
specimens.  A  young  specimen  from  the  Huachuca  Mountains  has 
the  light  lines  no  more  distinct  than  the  adults  from  the  same  region. 
The  tails  of  the  young  are  bright  blue  to  ultramarine  and  the  color 
is  retained  until  about  half  grown.  The  adults  of  the  Arizona  speci- 
mens are  more  grayish  than  Mexican  specimens. 

In  the  Alfredo  Duges  Museum,  Guanajuato,  are  four  specimens 
labelled  "Plestiodon  callicephalus  San  Bias,  L.  Boc."  I  was  unable 
to  examine  the  specimens  save  through  their  container.  My  in- 
ability to  discern  all  the  characters  must  leave  their  identity  in 
doubt,  although  a  part  of  them  are  certainly  of  this  species. 

Remarks.  The  specimens  which  I  collected  in  Ash  Canon,  Hua- 
chuca Mountains,  Cochise  Co.,  Arizona,  were  taken  at  approxi- 
mately 6,000  feet  elevation.  Three  were  captured  by  overturning 
small,  flat  stones  exposed  to  the  sun.  Another  specimen  was  found 
running  over  stones  in  a  tiny  stream  that  trickled  at  the  bottom  of 
the  canon  at  this  elevation.  A  very  young  specimen  was  taken 
about  1,000  feet  lower  on  the  edge  of  a  small  flat  among  weeds  and 
grass. 

The  stomach  contents  show  the  typical  food  consisting  of  insects, 
with  a  predominance  of  small  Coleoptera,  and  occasional  dipterids 
and  blattids. 

The  specimen  described  differs  from  both  the  Arizona  and  Gua- 
najuato specimens  in  having  somewhat  narrower  dorsolateral  lines, 
and  in  having  distinctly  wider  brown  lateral  stripes.    They  agree  in 


Taylor:    The  <  1km  s  Ei  mm  es 


297 


the  general  color  pattern  and  in  most  of  the  details  of  squamation. 
One  of  the  specimens  in  the  Alfredo  Duges  Museum,  and  two  in 
Philadelphia,  have  the  parietal-  separated. 

Probably  the  mosl  significant  character  is  thai  the  Lower  secon- 
dary temporal  extends  more  of  its  area  behind  the  vertical  line 
drawn  from  posterior  edge  >^\  the  last  labial  than  other  specie-. 

Distribution.  This  species  is  a  very  wide-ranging  one.  occurring 
as  it  doe-  along  the  southern  part  of  Arizona,  and  extending  south 
to  the  state  of  Michoacan,  Mexico.  It  is  to  be  found  on  both  sides 
of  the  Sierra  Madre,  at  least  in  the  more  northern  part  of  its  range. 
Records  are  available  for  Arizona,  in  the  United  States,  and  Chi- 
huahua. Durango  (probably),  Zacatecas,  Guanajuato  and  Micho- 
acan, in  Mexico.  Specimens  have  been  taken  within  three  miles  of 
the  northern  boundary  of  Sonora  in  the  Huachuca  Mountains, 
Arizona. 

Most  of  the  records  suggest  that  the  species  is  a  highland  form, 
but  in  the  state  of  Arizona  the  records  for  Tombstone  and  Gila 
river  show  that  it  is  not  necessarily  confined  to  highland-. 


Fig.  15.    Distribution  of  Eumeces  callicephalus  Bocourt,  in 
Arizona  and  Mexico. 


298  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Locality  records: 

Arizona:    Gila  river  (U.S.N. M.  1,  Newberry  Coll.). 

Cochise    Co.:     Huachuca    Mts.    (C.A.S.   2,   Slevin    Coll.);    Ash    Canon, 

Huachuca    Mts.    (K.U.   5,    Taylor.    Wright   and    Lunceford    Colls.) ; 

Ramsey  Canon,  Huachuca  Mts.  (Mich.  1,  Gloyd  Coll.) ;  Tombstone 

(Field  1,  Willard  Coll.);  Carr  Canon,  Huachuca  Mts.     (A.N.S.P.  1, 

Hebard  and  Rehn  Colls.). 
Santa  Cruz  Co.:    Penablanca  Canon,  Tumacacori  Mts.   (A.M.N .H.  1). 

Chihuahua:    Madera  (M.C.Z.  1,  Brownlee  Coll.). 

Durango:    Ciudad  (B.M.  1,  Forrer  Coll.). 

Zacatecas:    Mesquital  del  Oro  (B.M.  1.  Buller  Coll.). 

Guanajuato:    Guanajuato  (Bocourt;  type  locality;  Duges  Coll.)  (A.N.S.P.  2) 
(Duges,  1897). 

Michoacan:    Michoacan  (Duges,  1897). 

Nayarit:    3  mi.  west  Tepic  (E.H.T.  1,  Taylor  Coll.). 

Eumeces  tetragrammus  (Baird) 

(Fig.    46,    Distribution) 
SYNONYMY 

1858.  Plestiodon  tetragrammus  Baird.  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sei.  Phila.,  1858,  p.  256  (type 
description;  type  locality  Lower  Rio  Grande;  type  number  3124  U.S.N.M.);  Baird, 
U.  S.  and  Mexican  Boundary  Surv.,  Rept.  of  Bound.,  Vol.  2,  pt.  2,  1859,  pp.  12,  13 
(Salado  river,  Doctor  Kennedy;  and  Matamoros,  Mex.,  Lt.  Couch.);  Garman,  Bull. 
Essex  Inst.,  XVI,  Jan.  9,  1884.  p.  10;  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List  N.  Amer. 
Amph.  Rept.,  1917,  p.  71;   Pratt.  Vert.  Anim.  U.  S.,  1923,  p.  207. 

1875.  Eumeces  tegragrammus  Cope.  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  1,  1875,  p.  45;  Boulenger, 
Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus..  III.  1887.  pp.  375-37G;  Cope,  Ann.  Rept.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus., 
1898  (1900),  p.  660  (fig.  134.  probably  not  of  this  species;  Cook  and  Cameron  coun- 
ties, Tex.);  Brown,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila..  1903,  p.  553  (restricted  to  the  Texas 
region) ;  Strecker,  Proc.  Biol.  Soc.  Washington,  XXI,  1908,  p.  49  (Refugio,  Refugio 
Co.,  Tex.);  Baylor  Uni.  Bull.  XII.  No.  1,  1909  (Burnett  Co.,  Tex.');  Ditmars,  The 
Reptile  Book,  1915,  p.  199;  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List  N.  Amer.  Amph. 
Rept.,  2d  Ed.,  1923,  p.  77;  Strecker  and  Williams,  Cont.  Baylor  Uni.  Mus.,  No.  12, 
Dec,  1927,  p.  14  (Granite  and  Burnett  counties,  Tex.);  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check 
List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  3d  Ed..  1933,  p.  83. 

History.  The  types,  originally  twelve  (or  more)  in  number,  were 
collected  in  Matamoros,  Mexico,  partly  by  Doctor  Berlandier,  and 
partly  by  Lieutenant  Darius  Nash  Couch,  who  conducted  an  expedi- 
tion, surveying  a  route  for  a  Pacific  railway  in  northern  Mexico. 
Lieutenant  Nash  purchased  a  collection  from  Doctor  Luis  Ber- 
landier, which  probably  contained  some  of  the  types,  and  these  with 
his  own  collections  were  sent  to  the  Smithsonian  Institution  in 
Washington.  Spencer  Baird  described  the  species  in  1858,  listing 
as  the  type,  No.  3124,  which  number  was  applied  to  all  the  speci- 
mens (at  least  twelve  originally).  Doctor  Kennerly,  who  was  with 
Lieut.  Col.  W.  H.  Emory  on  the  Mexican  Boundary  Survey,  later 
collected  a  specimen  "Below  Salado  river"  in  northern  Mexico. 

Apparently  no   further  specimens  were   collected  until  a  much 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  299 

later  date  when  specimens  collected  by  G.  H.  Ragsdale  and  C.  K. 
Worthen  in  Cook  and  Cameron  counties,  Texas,  respectively,  were 
sent  to  the  National  Museum. 

In  1900  Cope  mentions  that  some  of  the  specimens  from  Mata- 
moros,  Mexico,  are  "lustrous  black"  and  designates  two  specimens 
(No.  3120)  as  the  types  of  a  variety  funebrosus.  Since  that  time 
very  few  specimens  of  tetragrammus  have  been  found.  There  is  a 
single  specimen  in  the  American  Museum  of  Natural  History,  one 
in  the  Field  Museum,  two  in  the  Museum  of  the  University  of 
Michigan,  and  eight,  which  I  collected  in  Starr  and  Cameron 
counties,  Texas,  are  in  the  Kansas  University  Museum.  Strecker 
(see  synonymy)  reports  four  specimens,  three  of  which  are  presum- 
ably at  Baylor  University,  Texas.  One  specimen,  reported  by 
Strecker  from  Brewster  county,  is,  in  fact,  Eumeces  septentrionalis 
obtusirostris  (Bocourt)  (now  No.  58337  U.S.N.M.).  One  additional 
specimen  from  Brule,  Texas,  is  in  the  U.  S.  National  Museum. 

Two  specimens  in  the  British  Museum  from  Tampico,  Mexico, 
appear  to  belong  to  this  species.  Mr.  H.  W.  Parker  has  furnished 
me  with  an  excellent  photograph  and  a  drawing  of  the  head  of  one 
of  these  specimens,  and  on  these  I  have  essayed  an  identification. 

The  type  series,  U.S.N. M.  No.  3124,  consists  at  this  date  (Aug., 
1933)  of  a  series  of  eleven  specimens,  five  of  which  are  in  fair  con- 
dition, somewhat  discolored  by  preservative,  but  showing  more  or 
less  of  the  markings;  the  remainder  of  the  series  is  darker,  due,  I 
believe,  to  some  unusual  preservative.  Some  of  the  specimens  are 
a  deep  lavender,  approaching  black  in  color.  It  is  probable  that 
part  of  this  series  are  types  of  the  var.  funebrosus  Cope.  This  series 
bears  the  catalogue  entry  "Matamoras  Tamaulipas,  Lt.  B.  Couch, 
collector,  12  specimens."  An  old  specimen  in  the  U.  S.  National 
Museum,  No.  9233,  in  bad  state,  without  data,  appearing  to  be  of 
this  species,  may  be  the  missing  twelfth  specimen. 

I  am  designating  one  of  the  series  (specimen  measuring  69  mm. 
snout  to  vent;  tail  95  mm.)  numbered  by  me  3124A,  and  designated 
"lectotype"  (engraved  on  back  of  tag)  as  the  lectotype.  This  speci- 
men is  in  good  condition,  but  is  somewhat  discolored  and  a  few  of 
the  scales  are  missing  from  the  sides  and  back. 

Cope  (1900,  fig.  134)  gives  a  drawing  of  a  specimen  (number 
15543  U.S.N.M.,  a  specimen  no  longer  extant)  which  appears  to  be 
a  figure  of  a  specimen  of  Eumeces  septentrionalis  obtusirostris 
Bocourt.  It  shows  a  divided  mental  (sometimes  present  in  tetra- 
grammus),  one  nuchal  instead  of  the  typical  two  or  three,  and  the 


300  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

seventh  labial  separated  from  the  ear  by  one  instead  of  two  pairs 
of  postlabials. 

Diagnosis.  A  medium-sized  species  characterized  by  narrow  dor- 
solateral light  lines  separated  by  six  scale  rows  which  arise  on  the 
anterior  supraocular  and  continue  to  base  of  tail  (absent  or  dim  in 
old  adult  males) ;  a  lateral  line  begins  on  anterior  labials,  follows 
along  their  upper  edges,  passes  through  middle  of  ear  and  continues 
on  side  to  groin;  a  pair  of  curved  lines  on  head  arising  on  the 
rostral,  terminating  on  the  frontoparietals.  Postmental  single  or 
divided;  no  postnasal;  parietals  do  not  enclose  interparietal;  two 
or  three  pairs  of  nuchals;  seven  upper  labials,  the  last  largest;  26  or 
28  scale  rows;  limbs  touch  when  adpressed  in  young,  separated 
about  five  millimeters  in  adults. 

Description  of  species  (from  K.U.  No.  7756,  collected  20  miles 
north  of  Brownsville,  Cameron  Co.,  Texas,  by  E.  H.  Taylor;  the 
specimen  is  an  adult  male,  in  alcohol).  Portion  of  the  rostral  ap- 
pearing above,  not  extensive,  somewhat  less  than  half  the  area  of 
the  frontonasal;  supranasals  moderately  large,  forming  a  median 
suture;  frontonasals  much  broader  than  long,  separated  narrowly 
from  the  frontal,  broadly  in  contact  laterally  with  the  anterior 
loreal;  prefrontals  rather  large,  forming  sutures  with  the  fronto- 
nasal, frontal,  second  loreal,  first  supraocular,  first  superciliary,  and 
first  loreal,  the  lengths  of  the  sutures  varying  in  the  order  named. 
Frontal  relatively  narrow,  elongate,  considerably  longer  than  its 
distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  forming  a  slightly  acute  angle 
anteriorly,  and  an  obtuse  angle  posteriorly;  frontoparietals  pentag- 
onal, slightly  smaller  than  the  prefrontals,  forming  a  broad  median 
suture;  interparietal  small,  of  about  same  area  as  a  frontoparietal, 
in  contact  with  first  pair  of  nuchals;  parietals  rather  short,  their 
posterior  edges  forming  a  gentle  curve;  two  pairs  of  nuchals,  the 
anterior  wider  longitudinally,  and  shorter  transversely  than  the 
posterior. 

Nasal  moderate,  divided,  the  anterior  part  about  equal  to  the  area 
of  the  posterior  with  the  nostril ;  anterior  loreal  higher  than  posterior, 
higher  than  wide;  posterior  loreal  much  longer  than  high,  somewhat 
angular  posteriorly;  eight  superciliaries,  the  anterior  more  than 
double  the  size  of  the  posterior;  four  supraoculars,  three  touching 
the  frontal;  two  presuboculars,  four  postsuboculars;  a  small  pre- 
ocular  followed  by  a  small  scale ;  most  of  the  upper  palpebral  scales 
directly  in  contact  with  the  superciliaries;  five  elongate,  enlarged 
scales  on  the  eyelid,  separated  from  the  subocular  by  two  or  three 
rows  of  granular  scales;  two  very  small  postoculars. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Ki  mixes  301 

Primary  temporal  rectangular,  touching  the  large  fan-shaped  lower 
secondary;  upper  secondary  temporal  elongate,  widened  posteriorly; 
tertiary  temporal  large,  touching  the  upper  secondary;  seven  upper 
labials,  four  preceding  the  subocular,  the  first  slightly  larger,  and 
distinctly  higher  than  the  three  succeeding  scales;  subocular  longer 
than  high;  last  labial  distinctly  larger  than  the  sixth,  separated 
from  the  auricular  opening  by  (usually  )  two  pairs  of  scales  (each 
pair  sometimes  fusing)  ;  mental  very  large,  having  a  labial  border 
equal  to  rostral  and  the  first  upper  labials;  post-mental  single,  large; 
three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  second  pair  largest,  the  first  pair  in 
contact;  postgenial  scale  large,  bordered  on  its  inner  side  by  a  scale 
much  longer  than  wide.  Six  lower  labials,  five  on  right  side,  the 
last  greatly  elongated.  Nineteen  or  twenty  scales  around  the  ear; 
two  auricular  lobules,  small  and  inconspicuous. 

Lateral  scale  rows  parallel;  fifty-six  scales  in  a  dorsal  row  be- 
tween parietals  and  a  point  above  the  anus ;  the  neck  scales  follow- 
ing the  nuchals  are  transversely  widened ;  dorsal  body  scales  not  or 
but  slightly  larger  than  laterals ;  scale  rows,  29  behind  ear ;  27  about 
constricted  portion  of  neck;  30  rows  about  axillary  region,  27  rows 
about  middle  of  body,  and  21  about  the  base  of  the  tail;  six  preanals, 
the  median  relatively  small,  but  larger  than  the  outer  scales  which 
overlap  the  inner;  subcaudals  only  very  slightly  widened  (103  in 
specimen  with  complete  tail,  K.U.  7754).  The  lateral  postanal 
scute  is  not  or  but  slightly  differentiated.  Limbs  well-developed, 
failing  to  touch,  when  adpressed,  by  a  distance  equal  to  two  scale- 
lengths;  fourteen  scales  about  the  insertion  of  the  arm.  Outer 
wrist  tubercle  well  developed;  a  group  of  enlarged  palmar  tubercles, 
the  three  anterior  largest.  Lamellar  formula  for  fingers :  5 ;  8 ;  11 ; 
11;  8.  Sixteen  scales  about  insertion  of  hind  limb;  two  prominent 
median  heel  tubercles,  with  another  pair  anterior  to  and  slightly 
lateral  to  these ;  other  granules  on  feet  somewhat  tubercular,  slightly 
imbricate.  Lamellar  formula  for  toes:  6;  8;  12;  16;  10.  The 
terminal  lamellae  are  not  tightly  bound  about  the  base  of  the  claws; 
toes  surrounded  by  two  rows  of  scales  only,  a  dorsal  series  and  the 
ventral  lamellar  series.  There  is  a  very  much  reduced  area  of 
granular  scales  in  the  axilla. 

Color.  Above  olive-brown,  each  scale  being  slightly  darker  on 
its  anterior  third;  head  yellowish-brown  (reddish  in  life) ;  a  pair  of 
dim  dorsolateral  cream  or  tan  lines  begin  on  the  supraocular  and  are 
traceable  to  the  tail,  separated  by  six  scale  rows;  a  lateral  cream 
line  is  evident  behind  the  ear  (arises  on  the  rostral  or  first  labial  in 


302 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


the  young)  and  can  be  traced  to  the  groin;  between  this  and  the 
dorsolateral  line  is  a  brownish  stripe  which  extends  from  eye  to 
groin;  two  lines  originate  on  the  rostral,  curve  back  along  the  sides 
of  the  frontal  and  terminate  on  the  frontoparietals.  Chin,  neck  and 
breast  immaculate  cream,  as  are  the  undersides  of  the  limbs;  ab- 
domen grayish. 

Table  of  Measurements  of  Eumeces  tetragrammus  Baird 


Museum 

Number** 

Sex 

K.U. 

7756 

d" 

K.U. 

7757 
d1 

U.S.N.M. 
3124* 

A.M.N.H. 
8160 

Mich. 
54050 

K.U. 

7754 

<? 

K.U. 

7747 
o" 

K.U. 

7755 
9 

Mich. 

69252 

>g- 

U.S.N.M. 
78581 

yg- 

Snout  to  vent. . . 
Tail 

71 

71 

69 
95f 

22 

5 

13 

34 

9 
10 
10 
14 
20 

8 

67 

64 

62 
109.5 

23 

4.5 
11.2 
34 

9.7 
10.2 
10.2 
15 
22 

7.2 

58 

54 

52 

34 
39 

Snout  to  fore- 
limb  

Snout  to  eye. .  .  . 

26 

5.2 
14 
39 
11 

12.2 
12 

16.5 
24 

8 

24 

5.2 
13 
36 
11 
11 
13 

16.5 
22 

8 

23 

19 

22 

34 

8.5 

9 

9 
12 
17 

6 

17 

3.5 

9.2 
28 

8 

9 

8 
12 
17 

6 

IS 

12.2 

Axilla  to  groin .  . 
Width  of  head .  . 

34 

8 

9.3 
10 
13 
20 
10 

38 

9.S 
10.8 
10 
13 
18 

7 

27 

8 

9.2 

9 
13 
20 

7 

19 

Length  of  head . . 

Width  of  body.  . 

Hind  leg 

Longest  tos 

9 
11 
4.8 

*  Lectotype.  t  Broken. 

**  Numbers  7756,  7757,  54050,  7754,  7755  are  from  near  Brownsville,  Cameron  Co.,  Texas; 
3124,  Matamoros,  Mexico;  8160,  Padre  Island,  Cameron  Co.,  Texas;  7747,  Arroyo  El  Salado 
near  Rio  Grande  City,  Starr  Co.,  Texas;  69252  San  Jose,  Mexico;  78581,  Brule,  Rio  Grande, 
Texas. 

Variation.  Twenty-five  specimens  have  been  examined,  includ- 
ing the  type  series.  The  following  scale  variations  occur:  Parietals 
never  enclose  the  interparietal;  frontonasal  touches  frontal  six 
times,  separated  19  times;  invariably  four  supraoculars,  with  three 
touching  the  frontal;  the  number  of  upper  labials  7-7  save  in  one 
case,  where  the  third  and  fourth  are  joined  on  the  left  side;  the 
seventh  labial  is  the  largest;  lower  labials  six;  scales  about  ear 
13  to  16;  nuchals  1-1,  two  times;  2-2,  sixteen  times;  2-3,  five  times, 
and  3-3,  two  times.  The  mental  is  single  in  21  cases,  double  in  4 
(these  latter  all  in  the  type  series  from  Matamoros,  Mexico). 
Postnasal  invariably  absent. 

Scales  from  occiput  to  above  anus  vary  from  53  to  59 ;  the  highest 
and  lowest  numbers  occur  only  once;  54,  seven  times;  55,  two  times; 
56,  five  times;  57,  three  times;  58,  five  times.  The  scale  rows  about 
the  neck  are  28  or  30,  the  lower  number  most  frequent;  scales  about 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


303 


the  middle  of  the  body,  26  to  28;  2(3,  occurs  eight  times;  27,  two 
times;  and  28,  fourteen  times.  The  superciliaries  wiry  from  five  to 
eight;  presuboculars  two,  the  postsuboculars  four.  One  specimen 
has  the  frontal  transversely  segmented.  The  markings  are  much 
more  distinct  in  the  young.  In  a  young  specimen  iK.U.  12746) 
the  dorsolateral  and  lateral  lines  are  greenish,  showing  metallic 
glints.  The  curved  head  lines  terminate  on  the  frontoparietals;  on 
the  neck  the  dorsolateral  line  follows  the  third  scale  row.  then  for  a 
time  it  borders  the  third  and  fourth,  and  through  the  latter  half  of 
the  body  follows  only  the  fourth  row;  the  dorsolateral  line  may  or 
may  not  join  the  curved  head  lines  anteriorly.  The  dorsal  colora- 
tion of  the  young  is  much  darker  than  in  adults.  It  is  usually 
blackish-brown  with  minute  metallic  flecks.  In  no  specimens  I 
have  examined  do  the  curved  head  lines  extend  back  and  form  a 
union.  The  tail  is  blue  in  the  young  and  the  abdominal  region  is 
usually  a  light  greenish-blue  in  life. 

Remarks.  I  have  usually  found  this  species  when  tearing  up  the 
large  "nests"  of  pack  rats.  They  appear  to  be  especially  secretive. 
I  have  never  observed  a  specimen  moving  about  above  ground.  It 
may  probably  be  that  the  species  is  somewhat  nocturnal. 


Fig.  46.   Distribution  of  Eumeces  tetragrammus  (Baird),  in 
Texas  and  Mexico. 


304  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

The  stomach  contents  examined  showed  a  large  percentage  of 
arachnid  food.  One  specimen  had  several  insect  egg  cases,  belong- 
ing to  an  undetermined  species,  probably  a  blattid. 

Distribution.  The  locality  data  available  shows  this  species 
occupying  a  territory  in  southern  Texas  and  Tamaulipas.  The  most 
northern  (unquestioned)  record  is  Dilley.  Tex.;  the  most  southern, 
Tampico,  Vera  Cruz,  a  north-south  range  of  about  500  miles. 

Locality  records: 

Texas : 

Cameron  Co.:   Brownsville  (U.S.N. M.  1);  20  miles  north  of  Brownsville 
(K.U.  5)  (Mich.  1)   (Field  1);  Padre  Island  (A.M.N.H.  1). 

Starr  Co.:    Arroyo  El  Salado,  near  Rio  Grande  City  (K.U.  1);  Arroyo 
Los  Olmos,  3  mi.  SE  Rio  Grande  City  (Taylor-Smith  1). 

Refugio  Co.:    Near  Refugio  (Strecker  1). 

Burnett  Co.:    Honey  Creek  (Strecker  1). 

Frio  Co.:    Near  Dilley  (K.U.  1). 
Tamaulipas,  Mexico:    Matamoros  (U.S.N.M.  Types  11);  San  Jose  (Mich.  1); 

Hacienda  La  Clementina,  near  Forlon,  68  mi.  S,  Ciudad  Victoria  (Smith- 

Dunkle  1). 
Vera  Cruz:   Tampico  (British  Mus.  2). 

OBSOLETUS  GROUP 

To  this  group  I  assign  a  single  American  species,  Eumeces  ob- 
soletus  (Baird  and  Girard),  ranging  throughout  the  southwest- 
ern United  States  and  northern  Mexico,  and  three  Asiatic  forms, 
Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis,  E.  chinensis  pulcher  and  E.  kishinouyei. 
The  group  is  characterized  by  the  deep  black  coloration  of  the 
young,  with  light  body  lines,  or  lacking  all  body  lines  and  with  a 
series  of  white  or  cream  spots  on  the  scales  of  the  head.  Tail  a 
brilliant  azure  blue. 

Adults  lose  the  uniform  black  and  blue  color  and  become  olive, 
with  a  blackish  area  on  each  scale,  the  areas  sometimes  arranged 
in  rows,  forming  indistinct  lines. 

Scales  on  sides  of  body  in  diagonal  rows  (obsoletus,  usually)  or 
parallel  (in  Asiatic  forms) ;  postnasal  present  or  absent;  seven  or 
eight  upper  labials;  four  supraoculars;  scale  rows  25-30;  legs  long, 
overlapping,  usually,  in  adults. 

Two  postmentals  (rarely  single)  ;  parietals  not  enclosing  inter- 
parietal; one  pair  of  nuchals  usually;  postgenial  large,  bordered  by 
a  scale  longer  than  wide;  two  or  three  supraoculars  touch  frontal. 

I  believe  that  the  closest  relative  of  this  group  will  be  found  in  the 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  305 

Fasciatys  group,  but  I  cannot  definitely  point  out  one  member  of 
that  group  which  represents  a  closer  approach  than  another.  The 
variation  in  the  relationship  of  the  supraoculars  to  the  frontal;  the 
variation  in  the  postnasal;  and  the  superimposed  reddish  spotting 
on  the  sides  of  the  body,  are  characters  which,  together  with  many 
others,  cause  nie  to  place  these  American  and  Chinese  forms  to- 
gether. 

Key  to  the  Species  of  the  Obsoletts  Group 

A.    Body  lacking  light   lines  in  young  and  adult;    the  young  with  white  or  cream  spots 
on  the  head  scales.     (Central  and  southwestern   United   states,  and   Mexico). 

Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard),  page  305 
AA.    Body  with  well-defined  lines  in  young  and  adults. 

B.  A  seven-lined  form;  the  median  light  line  bifurcating,  and  appearing  dimly 
on  the  head;  the  sublateral  more  or  less  broken  into  spots  anteriorly.  Very 
large  insular  form;  maximum  size,  164  mm.:  the  limbs  broadly  overlapping; 
24-26  scale  rows;  17  lamellae  under  fourth  toe;  two  or  three  pairs  of  nuchals; 
normally  a  postnasal;  three  (occasionally  two)  supraoculars  normally  touch 
frontal;  two  postmentals ;  dorsal  and  lateral  scales  of  adults  usually  showing 
striae.     (Yaeyama  and   Miyaka  groups  of  Riu  Kiu  Islands). 

Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger,  page  334 

BB.    Five-lined   forms,   showing  no  evidence   of   forking  lines   on   head   or  striations 
on  scales;  smaller  forms,  maximum  size,  127  mm.;   normally  no  postnasal. 
C.    Three    (normally)    supraoculars    touch    frontal ;     dorsolateral    light    lines 
broken;    six   (normally)   upper  labials;    adult   females   retain   the  juvenile 
color  pattern.      (Northern  central   China). 

Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron),  page  328 

CC.  Normally  two  supraoculars  touch  frontal;  dorsolateral  light  line  con- 
tinuous; lateral  light  line  broken  into  spots,  with  other  light  spots  above 
and  below  it :  adult  females  lose  juvenile  color  pattern.  (Southern 
central  China) Eumeces  chiru  rests  chinensis  (Gray),  page  320 

Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard) 

(Plate  24;    Figs.   47,  48) 
SYNONYMY 

1852.  Plestiodon  obsoletum  Baird  and  Girard.  Proc.  Acad.  Sci.  Phila.,  VI,  1852,  p.  129 
(type  description;  type  locality,  Valley  of  the  Rio  San  Pedro  of  the  Rio  Grande  del 
Norte) ;  Hallowell,  Reptiles  in  Sitgreaves'  Rept.  of  an  Exped.  down  the  Zuni  and 
Colorado  rivers,  1853,  pp.  Ill,  112  (complete  description  of  type) ;  Hallowell,  Proc. 
Acad.  Sci.  Phila.,  1856,  p.  239  (Kansas  specimens);  Baird,  U.  S.  and  Mexican 
Boundary  Survey,  Reptiles  of  the  Boundary,  Vol.  2,  pt.  2,  1859,  p.  12,  pi.  XXV, 
figs.  9-16  (obsoletus);  Baird,  Expl.  and  Survey  for  a  R.  R.  Route  to  Pacific  Ocean, 
1859,  p.  39  ("Coal  Creek,  Arkansas");  Garman,  Bull.  Essex  Inst,,  XVI,  Jan.  9,  1884, 
pp.  14,  15;  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  &  Rept.,  1917,  p.  70; 
Strecker,  Bull.  Sri.  Soc.  San  Antonio,  No.  4,  1922,  p.  22;  Van  Denburgh,  Occ.  Papers 
Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  No.  1,  Nov.  23,  Vol.  I,  1922,  pp.  589,  594,  pi.  57  (detailed  descrip- 
tion);  Pratt,  Vert.  Anim.  U.  S.,  1923,  p.  206. 

1852.  Lamprosaurux  guttulatus  Hallowell.  Proc.  Acad.  Sci.  Phila.,  Dec,  1852,  pp.  206,  207 
(type  description:  type  locality,  Fort  Fillmore  below  "Jornada  del  Muerte,"  N.  M.) ; 
Garman,  Bull.  Es«  \  [nst.,  XVI,  Jan.  19,  1884,  pp.  14,  15;  Hallowell,  Reptiles  in 
Sitgreaves'  Report  of  an  Exped.  Zuni  and  Colorado  rivers,  Is:.:;,  pp.  112,  113,  pi.  IV 
(complete  description  of  type). 

1857.  Plestiodon  guttulatus  Hallowell.  Proc.  Acad.  Nat,  Sci.  Phila.,  l.s.">7.  p.  215;  Baird, 
U.  S.  and  Mex.  B. .und.  Surv.,  Emory,  Vol.  2,  pt.  2.  1859,  p.  12.  pi.  24,  figs.  20-2S; 
Baird,  Expl.  and  Surv.  of  a  R.  R.  Route  to  the  Pac.  Owan,  Zool.,  Rept.,  No.  3, 
Vol.  X,   1859,  p.   18   ("Upper  Arkansas");    Stejnegei    and    Barbour,   Check   List   of   X. 

20—1123 


306  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Amer.  Amph.  and  Reptiles,  1917,  pp.  09,  70;  Van  Denburgh,  Occ.  Papers  Cal.  Acad. 
Sci.,  X,  Vol.  I,  1922,  pp.  594-597  (very  detailed  description);  Pratt,  Vert.  Anim. 
of  U.   S.,  1923,  p.  207. 

1866.    PHstodon  obsoletus  Cope.     Proc.   Acad.   Nat.   Sci.   Phila.,   1800,   p.   3u4. 

1866.    PHstodon   guttulatus  Cope.     Proc.  Acad.  Nat,  Sci.  Phila..   I860,  p.   304. 

1875.  Eumeces  obsoletus  Cope.  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat,  Mus.,  No.  1,  1875,  p.  45;  Yarrow,  Rept. 
Geog.  Geol.  Explr.  Surv.,  West  100th  Mer.,  Wheeler.  Vol.  5,  Zool.,  Chap.  4,  1878, 
p.  556;  Coues,  Rept.  Geog.  &  Geol.  Explr.  and  Surv.,  West  100th  Mer.,  Wheeler, 
Vol.  5,  Zool.,  Chap.  V,  1878,  p.  604;  Cope,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat,  Mus.,  No.  17,  1880, 
pp.  18,  39,  40  (variations  in  species);  Cragin,  Kansas  Acad.  Sci.,  VII,  1879-'80,  p. 
115  (reprint,  1906);  Bocourt,  Miss.  Sci.  Mexique,  Liv.  7,  1881,  pi.  XXII  A,  figs.  4. 
4a,  4b,  and  pi.  XXII  D,  figs.  4,  4a  (complete  description  of  a  Kansas  specimen); 
Yarrow,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  24,  1882,  p.  40;  Davis  and  Rice,  111.  State  Lab. 
Nat.  Hist.  Bull.,  No.  5,  1883,  p.  47;  Davis  and  Rice,  Bull.  Chicago  Acad.  Sci.,  I, 
No.  3,  1883,  p.  31  ("central  and  southern  Illinois");  Boulenger,  Cat,  Liz.  British 
Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  374;  Cope,  Bull.  U.S.N.M.,  No.  32,  1887,  p.  46  ("City  of 
Chihuahua");  Cope,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1892,  p.  334:  Cockerell,  Amer. 
Nat.,  XXX,  1896,  p.  326;  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (2),  VI,  1896,  pp. 
338-349;  Cope,  Rept,  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  1898,  (1900),  pp.  646-649,  fig.  128  (detailed 
description  and  distributional  data);  Brown,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Phila.,  1903,  p. 
548;  Stone  and  Rehn,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat,  Sci.  Phila.,  1903,  pp.  16,  34;  Baihy,  North 
Amer.  Fauna,  No.  25,  1905,  pp.  35,  45;  Strecker,  Proc.  Biol.  Soc.  Wash.,  XXI,  1908, 
p.  73;  Strecker,  Baylor  U.  Bull.,  XII,  No.  1,  Jan.,  1909,  pp.  0,  14;  Strecker,  Baylor 
U.  Bull.,  XIII.  Nos.  4  and  5,  1910,  pp.  13,  14;  Stone,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci.  Ph:la.. 
1911,  p.  231;  Ellis  and  Henderson,  Univ.  Colo.  Studies,  X,  No.  2,  1913,  pp.  79,  80, 
pi.  Ill,  figs.  15,  16;  Van  Denburgh  and  Slevin,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  III,  1913, 
P.  393;  and  idem  (4),  V,  1915,  p.  106;  Strecker,  Bull.  Baylor  Uni.,  XVIII,  No.  4, 
1915,  p.  26;  Ditmars,  Reptile  Book,  1915,  p.  198;  Jordan,  A  Manual  Vert.  Anim. 
U.  S.,  1916,  p.  201;  Anon.,  Okla.  Geol.  Survey  Circular  6,  1917,  p.  35;  Ste'neger 
and  Barbour,  Check  List  N.  Amer.  Amph.  Rept.,  2d  Ed.,  1923,  p.  76;  Van  Denburgh, 
Proc.  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  XIII,  No.  12,  1924,  p.  214  (New  Mexico  records); 
Ortenburger,  Copeia,  No.  155,  1926,  p.  138  (Oklahoma);  Ortenburger,  Univ.  Okla. 
Bull.,  Proc.  Oklahoma  Acad.  Sci.,  IV,  pt,  1,  1926,  p.  95  (Oklahoma);  Strecker  and 
Williams,  Cont.  Baylor  U.  Mus.,  No.  12,  Dec,  1927,  p.  14  (Texas  reports);  Orten- 
burger, Copeia,  No.  163,  1927,  p.  47  (Oklahoma  record);  Burt,  Occ.  Papers  Mus. 
Zool.  U.  Mich.,  No.  189,  1927,  p.  4;  Burt,  Trans.  Acad.  Sci.  St.  Louis,  XXVI,  No.  1, 
1928,  pp.  58-63  (Unites  obsoletus  and  guttidatus;  habits  and  distribution  in  Kansas); 
Burt,  Jour.  Kansas  Ent.  Soc,  I,  No.  3,  1928,  pp.  62,  63;  Burt,  Occ.  Papers  Mus. 
Zool.,  Uni.  Mich.,  No.  201,  June  17,  1929,  pp.  1-12,  pis.  1-3  (monographic  treatment); 
Gloyd,  Trans.  Kan.  Acad.  Sci.,  XXXI,  1929,  p.  120  (breeding  habits);  Burt  and 
Burt,  Jour.  Wash.  Acad.  Sci.,  XIX,  No.  20,  1929,  p.  455  (Kansas);  Burt  and  Burt, 
Amer.  Mus.  Nov.,  No.  381,  1929,  p.  10  (Kansas);  Strecker,  Baylor  Uni.  Contr.  to 
Folklore,  No.  3,  1929,  p.  6  (aquatic  and  hibernation  habits);  Force,  Copeia,  No.  12, 
1930,  p.  29  (Oklahoma);  Ortenberger  and  Freeman.  Pub.  Uni.  Okla.,  XI,  Biol. 
Survey,  No.  4,  1930,  p.  181  (Oklahoma);  Strecker,  Cont.  Baylor  U.  Mus.,  No.  23. 
1930,  p.  11:  Mosauer,  Occ.  Papers  Mus.  Zool.  U.  of  Mich.,  No.  246,  1932,  p.  10 
Guadalupe  Mts.);  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List  N.  A.  Amph.  Rept.,  3d  Ed., 
1933,  p.  82. 

1875.  Eumeces  guttulatus  Cope.  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  1,  1875,  p.  45;  Yarrow,  Rept. 
Geog.  and  Geol.  Explr.  and  Surveys,  West  100th  Mer.,  Wheeler,  Vol.  5,  Zool.,  Chap. 
IV,  p.  556;  Coues,  Rept.  Geog.  and  Geol.  Explr.  Surv.,  West  100th  Mer.,  Wheeler, 
Vol.  5,  1878,  p.  604;  Cragin,  Trans.  Kan.  Acad.  Sci.,  VII,  1879-'80  (1880),  p.  115 
(reprint,  1906);  Yarrow,  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  No.  24,  1882,  p.  41;  Boulenger,  Cat. 
Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  Ill,  1887,  p.  369;  Cope,  Rept.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.  for  1898,  (1900), 
pp.  645,  646,  fig.  127;  Bailey,  N.  Amer.  Faun.,  No.  25,  1905,  pp.  35,  45;  Strecker, 
Baylor  Uni.  Bull.,  XIII,  Nos.  4  and  5,  1910,  p.  13  ;  Ellis  and  Henderson,  Univ.  Colo. 
Studies,  X,  No.  2,  1913,  pp.  78-80,  figs.  15,  16;  Strecker,  Baylor  Bull.,  XVIII,  No.  4, 
1915,  p.  26;  Ditmars,  The  Reptile  Book,  1915,  p.  198;  Jordan,  A  Manual  of  Vert. 
Anim.  U.  S.,  1916,  p.  201;  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  Check  List  of  N.  Amer.  Amph. 
Rept.,  2d  Ed.,  1923,  p.  75;  Grant,  Copeia,  No.  164,  1927,  pp.  67-09  (habits);  Burt, 
Occ.  Papers  Mus.  Zool.  U.  Mich.,  No.  189,  1927,  p.  14  (regarded  as  "probably" 
obsoletus);   Burt,  Jour.  Kansas  Ent,  Soc,  1,  No.  3,  1928,  p.  62;    Ortenburger,  Copeia, 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  307 

No.    173,    1930,   p.    94;    Ortenburger   and   Freeman,    Pub.    Univ.    Okla.,    Vol.    II,    Biol. 
Surv.,  No.  4,  1930,  p.  181. 
1929.    Eumeces  fasciatus  Burt  (non  Linne).     Occ.   Papers   Mus.   Zool.   Univ.   Mich.,   No.    201, 
June  17,   1929,  p.   6. 

History.  This  large  and  conspicuous  member  of  the  genus  enjoys 
the  distinction  of  having  been  described  twice  the  same  year,  and  in 
the  same  journal,*  under  different  names  and  in  different  genera. 

The  older  name.  Plestiodon  obsoletum,  appearing  on  page  129 
(loc.  cit.).  was  applied  by  Spencer  Baird  and  Charles  Girard  to  an 
adult  specimen  (No.  3133  U.S.N.M.)  collected  by  John  H.  Clark 
(under  Col.  J.  D.  Graham),  of  the  Mexican  Boundary  Commis- 
sion, in  the  Valley  of  the  Rio  San  Pedro  (at  present  Devil's  river), 
Texas.  The  second  name.  Lamprosaurus  guttulatus  (appearing  on 
page  206),  was  applied  by  Edward  Hallowell  to  a  very  young, 
mutilated  specimen,  collected  by  Doctor  Hammond  below  the 
Jornada  del  Muerte,  Fort  Fillmore,  N.  Mex. 

The  following  year  Hallowell  (1853)  redescribed  the  adult  speci- 
men from,  presumably,  Baird  and  Girard's  type  specimen  (different 
total  length  given)  ;  he  likewise  published  a  detailed  description  of 
the  type  of  Lamprosaurus  guttulatus  in  the  same  work.  This  type 
is  now  in  the  Philadelphia  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences  Collection. 
Three  years  later  (Hallowell,  1856)  Plestiodon  obsoletus  was  re- 
ported from  Kansas  on  the  basis  of  five  specimens  sent  to  the 
Philadelphia  Academy. 

In  the  next  year,  Hallowell  (1857),  having  obtained  two  Kansas 
specimens  of  the  young,  referred  them  to  Plestiodon  guttulatus, 
relegating  his  Lamprosaurus  to  synonymy.  Of  the  type  he  says, 
''The  original  specimen  from  Xew  Mexico  was  in  such  a  condition 
as  to  render  it  extremely  difficult  to  determine  its  true  characters." 
Two  years  later  (Baird.  1859), f  both  species  were  figured. 

From  this  time  on,  to  1917,  the  two  forms  were  considered  distinct. 
Stejneger  and  Barbour  (1917,  page  69),  in  a  footnote  to  Plestiodon 
guttulatus,  state,  '"Possibly  the  young  of  obsoletus? ,"  but  in  1923 
the  names  are  maintained  as  distinct  species.  Since  that  time,  cer- 
tain authors  have  synonymized  the  forms,  and,  in  the  most  recent 
checklist  I  Stejneger  and  Barbour,  1933),  they  are  considered  as  a 
single  species. 

In  published  works  Eumeces  obsoletus  has  only  on  rare  occasions 
been  confused  with  other  species.     Van  Denburgh   (1922)   referred 

*  Proceedings  of  the  Academy  Nat.  Sci.,  Philadelphia,  1852. 

f  Baird,  U.  S.  and  Mexican  Boundary  Survey,  Rept.  of  the  Boundary,  1859,  pp.  1-35, 
plate  XXV,  figs.  9-16  (obsoletus)  and  plate  XXVI,  figs.  20-28  (guttulatus)  the  latter  from 
San  Elizario,  Tex. 


308  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

specimens  of  Eumeces  callicephalus  from  the  Huachuca  Mts.,  Ari- 
zona, to  this  species  as  the  young.  Cope,  at  an  earlier  date  (1900), 
confuses  a  young  callicephalus  with  this  form  (U.S.N.M.  9231),  a 
specimen  which  Burt  (1929)  erroneously  refers  to  as  "a  young  and 
mutilated  specimen  of  fasciatus."  In  this  same  work  Burt  refers  to  a 
specimen  of  obsoletus  (U.S.N.M.  3151,  Matamoros,  Mex.)  as  "Prob- 
ably fasciatus." 

In  certain  museums  the  species  has  been  confused  with  multivir- 
gatus,  and  numerous  specimens  were  found  so  labeled. 

With  the  exception  of  Eumeces  fasciatus  (including  laticeps  and 
inexpectatus  as  treated  by  recent  authors),  this  is  the  best  known 
American  form,  due  to  numerous,  and  in  some  cases  extensive, 
accounts  of  it  that  have  appeared. 

With  regard  to  the  relationship  of  this  species  I  have  been  some- 
what in  doubt.  I  believe  that  it  should  be  considered  in  a  section 
apart  and  may  represent  one  of  the  older  species  of  the  group.  The 
absence  of  any  typical,  white,  dorsolateral  or  lateral  lines,  and  the 
intense,  uniform,  black  coloration  of  the  young  with  the  cream  or 
yellow  light  spots  on  the  head,  show  a  lack  of  near  relationship 
with  any  of  the  other  species  in  its  own  group.  It  agrees  with 
Eum.eces  longirostris  in  having  (usually)  the  lateral  scales  arranged 
diagonally,  but  in  all  other  pertinent  characters  they  differ  widely. 
In  the  scale  pattern  of  the  head,  the  character  of  the  preanal 
plates,  the  terminal  scales  of  the  digits,  the  scales  about  the  insertion 
of  the  limbs,  the  character  and  relationship  of  trie  postgenial,  this 
form  differs  but  little  from  the  Skiltonianus  and  Fasciatus  groups 
and  may  be  an  aberrant  form  derived  from  the  common  ancestral 
stock  of  these  groups. 

The  type  specimen  (No.  3133  U.S.N.M.)  is  still  in  good  condi- 
tion save  that  many  of  the  dorsal  scales  have  slipped. 

Diagnosis.  A  large  species  lacking  typical,  median,  dorsolateral 
and  lateral  white  lines;  young  black,  with  white  spots  on  upper  and 
lower  labials,  and  on  other  head  scales  except  loreals  and  temporals; 
pitting  on  scales  dim  in  young,  but  still  evident  in  adults;  outer 
preanal  scales  overlapping  inner;  subcaudals  widened;  postgenial 
large,  bordered  by  a  scale  longer  than  wide;  one  or  no  postnasal; 
two  postmentals  (rarely  one);  nuchals  small;  lateral  scale  rows 
usually  diagonal;  usually  26  or  28  scale  rows  about  the  middle  of 
body. 

Description  of  species  (from  No.  4804,  Taylor-Smith  collection. 
Rio  Grande  City,  Tex.,  September,  1932;  adult  male).    Portion  of 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


309 


the  rostral  visible  from  above  about  equal  to  the  area  of  the 
frontonasal;  supranasals  relatively  large,  forming  a  median  suture; 
frontonasal  generally  lozenge-shaped,  in  contact  laterally  with  the 
anterior  loreal,  widely  separated  from  the  frontal  by  prefrontals; 
latter  large,  each  nearly  equal  to  area  of  the  frontonasal;  their 
broadest  suture  with  the  frontonasal;  sutures  likewise  formed  with 
the  frontal,  second  loreals,  first  loreals,  first  superciliaries,  and  first 
supraoculars,  the  length  of  sutures  diminishing  in  the  order  named; 
frontal  not  especially  large,  somewhat  shorter  than  its  distance  from 
tip  of  snout  or  from  the  posterior  part  of  interparietal,  more  than 
one  and  one  half  times  wider  anteriorly  than  posteriorly,  the  sides 


Fig.  47.  Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard).  K.U.  No.  7775,  Cam- 
eron Co.,  Texas.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  16.5  mm.;  width,  14  mm. 


generally  straight,  or  very  slightly  concave;  frontoparietals  large, 
forming  a  long  median  suture,  widely  separating  interparietal  and 
frontal;  interparietal  narrow,  elongate,  less  than  once  and  a  half 
times  as  wide  anteriorly  as  posteriorly,  not  enclosed  by  the  parie- 
tals;  parietals  relatively  short  and  wide;  a  single  pair  of  small, 
differentiated  nuchals. 

Nasal  scale  somewhat  smaller  than  supranasal,  the  scale  divided 
by  a  suture  from  nostril  to  upper  edge,  and  another  from  the  nostril 
to  the  lower  edge  of  the  scale;  the  anterior  portion  equal  to  or 
somewhat  smaller  than  posterior  part,  including  nostril;  anterior 
loreal  narrow,  higher  than  posterior;  latter  large,  the  anterior  part 
of  upper  edge  not  or  slightly  higher  than  the  posterior,  highest  in 
the  middle,  lower  edge  on  a  level  with  that  of  the  anterior;  two 


310  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

presuboculars,  the  anterior  large,  the  second  small,  slender,  dis- 
tinctly elongate,  not  forming  a  notch  between  fourth  labial  and  sub- 
ocular  labial,  but  lying  with  the  greater  part  of  its  length  above 
the  subocular;  four  supraoculars,  three  touching  frontal,  the  last 
short  and  wide,  but  much  larger  than  first ;  eight  superciliaries,  the 
anterior  largest,  nearly  equal  to  the  first  supraocular,  at  least  four 
times  the  area  of  the  second  superciliary,  and  about  twice  as  large 
as  the  last,  vertical  superciliary ;  four  postsuboculars,  the  most 
posterior  much  longer  than  others,  about  half  the  size,  and  of  same 
general  shape  as,  the  primary  temporal;  latter  longer  than  wide, 
diagonally  placed,  about  one  fourth  or  one  fifth  the  size  of  the 
upper  secondary  temporal,  forming  a  suture  with  the  lower  second- 
ary, thus  separating  the  seventh  labial  and  the  upper  secondary 
temporal;  lower  secondary  temporal  irregularly  triangular,  the  apex 
pointing  down;  tertiary  temporal  slender,  elongate,  bordering  the 
lower  secondary,  widely  separated  from  the  ear  opening  by  two 
postlabial  scales;  seven  upper  labials,  the  last  largest;  the  four 
anterior  with  approximately  the  same  identical  elevation,  the  third 
or  fourth  larger  than  the  two  anterior ;  seventh  labial  separated  from 
the  auricular  opening  by  a  pair  of  enlarged  postlabials,  which  are 
succeeded  (usually)  by  two  pairs  of  smaller  scales;  the  auricular 
lobules  are  thick,  flattened  against  the  edge  of  ear  opening  rather 
than  extending  out  from  edge;  six  lower  labials,  last  much  elongated; 
mental  large,  the  length  of  the  labial  border  not  or  but  slightly 
larger  than  that  of  rostral;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  anterior 
pair  smallest,  separated  (usually  in  contact)  ;  postgenial  large, 
elongate,  bordered  on  the  anterior  internal  edge  by  a  scale  longer 
than  wide.  No  postnasal  on  left  side;  a  small  postnasal  present  on 
the  right  side;  four  median  upper  palpebral  scales  touching  the 
superciliaries;  lower  eyelid  with  a  series  of  vertically  elongate, 
opaque  scales  (transparent  in  life)  on  lower  lid,  separated  from  the 
subocular  by  three  or  four  rows  of  small  granular  scales,  the  lower- 
most row  somewhat  large,  frequently  pigmented  and  suggesting  a 
continuous  row  involving  presuboculars  and  postsuboculars. 

Scales  about  body  are  arranged  in  six  or  seven  parallel  rows  on 
the  dorsal  surface  of  the  back,  while  those  on  the  sides  are  arranged 
in  diagonal  rows  from  shoulder  to  groin ;  the  ventral  rows  are  again 
parallel;  the  scales  of  the  two  median  dorsal  rows  widest;  all  dorsal 
rows  larger  than  laterals  or  ventrals.  Thirty-seven  scale  rows  about 
the  anterior  part  of  neck  behind  ear;  32  about  constricted  portion  of 
neck;  40  rows  behind  insertion  of  arm;  25  rows  about  middle  of 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  311 

body;  19  rows  about  base  of  tail  (at  first  widened  subcaudal).  In 
a  dorsal  row  from  parietal  to  above  anus.  59  scales;  99  widened 
subcaudals,  their  transverse  length  about  three  and  one  half  to  four 
times  their  longitudinal  length;  preanal  region  bordered  by  six 
scales,  the  two  median  large,  the  outer  scales  overlapping  the  inner; 
about  22  scales  around  the  ear  opening. 

Limbs  well-developed,  overlapping  the  width  of  eight  lateral 
scales  when  adpressed;  22  scales  about  insertion  of  the  hind  limb; 
17  -tales  about  insertion  of  forelimb;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers: 
7;  10;  13;  13;  7.  A  heavy  thickened  scale  on  outer  side  of  wrist; 
palm  covered  with  several  much  enlarged,  flattened,  tubercular 
-tales,  intermingled  with  others  of  varying  sizes;  lamellar  formula 
tor  toes:  7;  10;  15;  17;  11.  Heel  bordered  by  six  large  padlike 
scales,  the  three  outer  the  larger,  the  most  distal  at  the  base  of  the 
tilth  and  first  toes;  sole  with  two,  much-enlarged  tubercles  sur- 
rounded by  numerous  scales  of  varying  size;  the  intercalated  series 
of  scales  on  the  fourth  toe  on  outer  side  reaches  to  base  of  ante- 
penultimate phalanx;  terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound  about 
daw  base;  a  group  of  small  granular  scales  in  axilla;  none  behind 
the  insertion  of  the  hind  limb. 

The  pitting  on  the  scales  is  evident  on  sides  of  neck,  axillary 
region,  along  side  of  body  and  at  side  of  the  base  of  the  tail,  on 
scales  of  dorsal  and  posterior  parts  of  upper  arm,  and  on  posterior 
and  dorsal  surface  of  the  femoral  region.  However,  the  pits  are 
small  and  few  in  number  on  each  scale  and  are  discerned  with 
difficulty. 

(  "lor.  Above,  the  general  color  of  the  dorsal  region  may  be  de- 
fined as  a  brownish  to  olive-gray,  generally  olive-brown  on  head; 
a  lighter  gray  to  bluish-gray  on  sides;  undersurface  generally 
creamy  white;  the  ground  color  of  the  tail  is  light  brownish  or  putty 
color.  All  the  scales  of  the  dorsal  surface  and  the  upper  lateral 
region  edged  with  dark  brownish-black  to  black,  the  color  some- 
what more  intense  on  lateral  side  of  scales,  thus  forming  indefinite 
parallel  lines  on  back  and  irregular  diagonal  lines  on  the  dorso- 
lateral region. 

Dorsal  head  scales  clouded  with  darker,  while  lateral  head  scales 
are  frequently  spotted  or  edged  with  dark  brown;  upper  labial  scales 
with  light  cream  >pot>  distinctly  discernible;  lower  labials  light,  like 
ventral  surface;  beginning  in  the  vicinity  of  the  auricular  opening, 
there  i-  a  -eries  of  indefinite  brick-red  spots,  which  continue  to 
groin;  part  of  the  blotches  are  in  the  more  heavily  pigmented  dorso- 


312 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


lateral  region;  others  are  lateral,  on  the  more  uniform  grayish 
lateral  ground  color;  upper  parts  of  limbs  with  markings  like  those 
on  dorsolateral  region  of  body;  below  white;  dorsal  lamellae  on  toes 
light,  edged  with  deep  brown  posteriorly. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard) 


Museum 

Number* 

K.U. 
7305 

yg- 

O.U. 

233 

cT 

K.U. 

7265 

9 

K.U. 

7  2  58 

K.U. 

7701 
0" 

U.S.N.M. 

3133 

? 

K.U. 

7696 
cf 

Field 

6838 

Sex 

d> 

Total  length 

129 

62 

280 

116 

Snout  to  vent 

55 

73 

82 

93 

110 

125 

Snout  to  foreleg 

20 

22 

27 

28 

30 

31 

36 

Tail   . 

67 
10 

164 
19 

Width  of  head 

10 

11 

15 

15 

18 

23    • 

Length  of  head 

10 

10.5 

11 

14  5 

16 

19.4 

16 

22 

6 

6 

7 

9 

13 

15 

18 

Foreleg 

14 

17 

18 

22 

24.6 

22 

28 

31 

19 

22 

23.5 

30 

26 

33 

35 

45 

Longest  toe 

7 

S 

8.5 

10 

10 

10 

12 

13 

Axilla  to  groin 

29 

32 

39 

45 

49.5 

55 

64 

65 

*No.  7305,  Morton  Co.,  Kansas;  7265,  7258,  Hyatt,  Anderson  Co.,  Kansas;  7701, 
7696,  Douglas  Co.,  Kansas;  233,  Franklin  Co.,  Kansas;  6838,  Brownsville,  Cameron  Co., 
Texas;   3133,  type,  Valley  of  Rio  San  Pedro,  Rio  Grande  del  Norte,  Texas. 

Color  variation.  Cope  (1900,  p.  648)  mentions  some  unusually 
marked  specimens  from  Kansas,  forwarded  by  Professor  Snow,  and, 
presumably,  from  the  vicinity  of  Lawrence,  Kansas.  Adults  of 
some  Kansas  and  Oklahoma  specimens  develop  a  rather  elaborate 
distribution  of  the  dark  pigment  so  that  a  secondary  pattern  is 
developed.  The  deep  blue-black  coloration  of  the  young  gives  place 
to  a  lightening  of  the  color  on  the  centers  of  the  scales  so  that  at 
about  the  third  year  many  approximate  the  color  pattern  of  in- 
dividuals from  the  southern  and  western  part  of  the  range.  Then  as 
they  become  older  there  is  a  tendency  for  the  segregation  of  more 
pigment  at  the  outer  edges  of  the  scales  of  the  first  and  second  rows, 
thus  defining  two  dark  lines,  with  a  wide  (width  of  two  scales) 
stripe  of  nearly  uniform  olive  ground  color,  usually  without  black 
pigment,  though  sometimes  with  the  edges  of  scales  dark;  the 
diagonal  rows  on  the  sides  likewise  shift  the  bulk  of  the  pigment 
to  the  lateral  edges  of  the  scales,  making  series  of  diagonal  dark 
lines.  In  many  old  males  the  regularity  of  the  lines  is  obliterated 
and  the  pattern  appears  as  scattered  flecks  over  the  dorsal  and 
dorsolateral  parts  of  the  body. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  313 

The  lined  type  of  coloration  is  more  or  less  evidenl  in  most  adult 
Kansas  specimens  (save  occasional  specimens  in  the  extreme  west), 

in  most  a»lult  Oklahoma  specimens,  and  occasionally  in  those  of 
northern  Texas.  Those  from  the  southern  part  of  Texas,  New  Mex- 
ico, and  Arizona  have  the  pigment  more  evenly  distributed  and  the 
lineation  is  usually  not  at  all  or  only  dimly  discernible.  The  amount 
of  pigment  on  the  tail  is  very  decidedly  less  in  southern  specimens, 
and  in  the  young  adults  the  tail  may  assume  a  pale  yellow-green 
color  without  any  dark  pigment,  and  in  the  older  ones  the  tail  is 
very  much  lighter  than  the  ground  color  of  the  back.  However,  it 
appears  that  this  character  is  developed  gradually,  and  progres- 
sively more  dark  pigment  is  in  evidence  the  farther  north  the  species 
is  traced. 

The  color  of  the  young  is  much  the  same  throughout  the  range. 
This,  at  hatching,  is  a  deep  black  over  much  of  the  body,  with  the 
tail  a  vivid  blue.  The  head  scales,  at  least  most  of  them,  have  each 
a  creamy  white  spot  varying  in  size  in  different  scales.  These  dots 
on  the  top  of  the  head  are  arranged  so  as  to  suggest  a  typical  pat- 
tern of  dorsolateral  white  lines  and  "bifurcating  lines"  in  the  mesial 
region.  A  similar  series  of  larger  ocellated  whitish  cream  dots  are 
in  evidence  on  each  upper  labial  and  each  lower,  and  invariably 
present  are  two  larger  auricular  spots,  one  preceding,  the  other  pos- 
terior to,  the  auricular  opening.  Occasionally,  a  young  specimen 
shows  a  dim,  more  or  less  continuous,  white  line  from  the  nuchal 
scale  along  the  neck  to  a  point  near  the  shoulder,  and  in  such  cases 
there  is  likewise  a  light  lateral  line  running  from  ear  to  a  point  near 
to  or  above  the  insertion  of  the  foreleg.  However,  this  has  been 
discerned  in  specimens  from  widely  separated  localities  both  in  the 
north  and  south,  and  may  appear  in  a  single  specimen  of  a  brood 
where,  in  all  the  other  specimens,  these  lines  are  lacking.  In  the 
northern  specimens,  the  white  dots  on  the  dorsal  surface  of  the  head 
border  the  sides  of  the  frontal  and  may  extend  to  near  the  nuchals; 
in  more  southern  and  particularly  southwestern  specimens,  from 
southeastern  Arizona,  the  dots  do  not  usually  follow  the  sides  of  the 
frontal.  Occasionally  there  is  a  white  dot  in  the  mesial  region  of 
the  anterior  part  of  the  frontal,  which  sometimes  assumes  a  V-shape. 
This  general  coloration  of  the  young  is  retained  through  the  second 
year,  and  the  deep  color  is  usually  replaced  by  lighter  areas  on  the 
centers  of  the  scales.  Postmentals  and  chinshields  frequently  have 
white  spots  less  distinct  than  those  on  the  labials. 

In  adult  males,  some  reddish  coloration  may  develop  on  the  tern- 


314  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

poral  region.  In  old  males  the  temporal  region  is  somewhat  bulged 
out.    It  never  reaches  such  dimensions  as  occur  in  hiticcps. 

Scale  variation  (approximately  260  specimens).  Like  other  mem- 
bers of  the  genus,  many  scale  characters  are  decidedly  unstable,  al- 
though in  the  number  of  scale  rows  about  the  body  and  in  the 
number  of  scales  in  a  row  from  parietals  to  above  vent  the  range  of 
variation  is  less  than  in  most  other  species. 

No  specimens  have  been  seen  with  parietals  enclosing  the  inter- 
parietal; the  nuchals  are  normally  one  pair;  two  pairs  have  been 
found  only  four  times,  while  an  added  scale  on  one  side  has  been 
found  ten  times. 

The  divided  postmental  shows  only  three  exceptions;  one  each 
from  Riley  and  Anderson  counties,  Kansas,  and  one  from  Cochise 
Co.,  Arizona,  in  which  there  is  a  single  scale. 

The  postnasal  scale  is  very  unstable  and  is  absent  sporadically  in 
southern  specimens,  but  generally  present,  while  in  specimens  from 
Kansas  it  is  generally  absent.  The  percentages  are  as  follows: 
Southern  Texas,  New  Mexico,  and  Arizona  specimens  97  percent 
present;  Oklahoma,  40  percent;  Kansas  (counting  two  specimens  as 
one  where  scale  is  present  on  one  side) ,  22  percent.  In  groups  of 
specimens  from  certain  counties  in  eastern  Kansas  the  percentage 
is  sometimes  less  than  4  percent  present. 

In  Kansas  specimens  there  is  a  strong  tendency  for  the  anterior 
loreal  to  segment  transversely,  and  this  anomaly  may  be  present 
on  one  or  both  sides  in  as  many  as  36  percent  of  the  specimens. 
There  is  no  apparent  variation  in  the  subcaudals,  chinshields,  upper 
labials  (the  lower  labials,  however,  are  frequently  reduced  to  five), 
preanals  and  supraoculars.  The  size  of  the  frontoparietal  and  its 
relation  to  the  loreals  is  very  unstable  in  northern  forms  and  it  may 
fail  to  touch  the  anterior  loreal  in  39  percent  of  the  specimens.  The 
frontoparietal  very  rarely  is  in  contact  with  the  frontal,  and  like- 
wise rarely  touches  the  rostral.  Five  specimens  show  it  contacting 
the  rostral  while  only  two  show  it  in  contact  with  the  frontal,  with 
the  consequent  separation  of  the  prefrontals. 

The  frontal  varies  in  length  and  as  a  consequence  the  number  of 
the  supraoculars  touching  it.  It  appears  that  the  posterior  part  only 
is  affected,  and  when  the  frontal  is  shortened,  the  frontoparietals  are 
distinctly  larger;  the  prefrontals  are  enlarged  at  the  expense  of 
frontonasal  and  not  of  the  frontal. 

The  superciliaries  vary  from  seven  to  ten,  the  numbers  eight  and 
nine  occurring  most  frequently;  the  general  relationship  of  size,  of 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  315 

the  first,  second,  and  last,  remains  fairly  stable.  The  number  of 
supraoculars  is  invariably  four,  but  either  two  or  three  scales  touch 
the  frontal,  two  being  the  more  frequent  number  in  the  northern 
specimens  (Oklahoma,  Kansas),  while  three  is  decidedly  the  more 
frequent  number  in  southern  (southern  Texas.  New  Mexico,  Ari- 
zona). The  temporal  scales  and  the  two  last  labials  vary  a  consid- 
erable amount  in  size,  but  bear  the  same  general  relationship.  The 
primary  temporal  increases  in  size  usually  at  the  expense  of  the 
upper  secondary.  It  thus  varies  from  one  fourth  or  one  fifth  to 
nearly  half  the  size  of  the  latter  scale,  and  often  approximates  the 
lower  secondary  temporal  in  size.  The  tertiary  is  always  present, 
showing  small  variation.  In  by  far  the  greater  number  of  specimens 
the  sixth  and  seventh  labials  are  equal  in  area;  and  in  certain  local- 
ities, especially  in  specimens  from  the  Guadelupe  Mountains,  New 
Mexico  and  Texas,  it  is  the  usual  condition.  The  number  of  post- 
labials  is  five  or  six,  the  scales  arranged  in  superimposed  pairs; 
rarely  are  the  pairs  united,  forming  larger  scales;  the  preauricular 
lobules  are  flattened,  thickened  scales,  two  or  three  usually  in  evi- 
dence; presuboculars  are  two,  normally,  with  one  occurring  several 
times  due  to  the  union  of  the  two  scales;  a  few  cases  show  the 
presence  of  three  scales,  due  to  a  segmentation  of  the  posterior  loreal. 
Four  is  the  expected  number  of  postsuboculars,  but  five  occurs  fre- 
quently ;  occasionally  the  lower  row  of  granular  eyelid  scales  are  en- 
larged somewhat  and  pigmented,  suggesting  a  continuous  post-  and 
presubocular  series  under  the  eye. 

The  number  of  scale  rows  varies  from  twenty-five  to  thirty.  How- 
ever, the  counting  is  difficult  due  to  the  diagonal  lines;  the  higher 
numbers,  27-28,  are  most  frequent  in  northern  forms;  26-27  more 
frequent  in  southern  forms;  the  number  of  axillary  rows  is  fewer  in 
southwestern  specimens  than  elsewhere.  The  lateral  rows  tend  in 
these  specimens  to  approach  a  parallel  with  the  dorsal  rows.  The 
median  dorsals  are  always  larger  than  other  dorsals,  and  all  dorsals 
are  usually  larger  than  the  lateral  series. 

The  limbs  tend  to  touch  or  overlap  generally  in  both  young  and 
adults,  but  in  some  specimens,  especially  adult  females,  the  legs 
may  fail  to  touch,  and  be  separated  by  one  or  a  few  scales. 

The  character  of  scales  on  the  feet  and  the  arrangement  of  la- 
mellae differ  little  or  not  at  all.  between  the  northern  and  southern 
forms;  the  lamellae  under  the  fourth  toe  range  from  fourteen  to 
seventeen,  the  higher  number  being  rare,  the  lower  numbers  oc- 
curring most  frequently. 


316  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

From  the  above  discussion  of  the  variations  in  different  popula- 
tions it  is  evident  that  subspecific  designations  could  not  be  reason- 
ably applied  to  the  variants  without  difficulty.  Were  the  color 
characters  constant,  particularly  as  regards  the  dark  markings  of 
the  dorsal  and  lateral  surface,  one  might  separate  a  subspecies  based 
on  the  presence  of  the  longitudinal  dark  dorsal  lines  and  diagonal 
dark  lines.  Unfortunately,  this  character  may  be  absent  in  young 
and  certain  very  old  specimens.  Southern  specimens  have  less  dark 
pigment  on  the  tail,  and  in  southwestern  specimens  the  tail  may  be 
almost  without  marking;  but  the  presence  of  lines  on  the  back  and 
an  intermediate  condition  of  pigment  on  the  tail  obtains  in  certain 
specimens. 

As  regards  the  scale  variation  we  find  again  a  lack  of  constancy. 
There  is,  to  be  sure,  a  great  tendency  to  eliminate  the  postnasal 
scute  in  the  lined  specimens,  a  tendency  which  increases  to  a  very 
great  percent  as  one  approaches  the  northeastern  limit  of  distribu- 
tion, but  the  increase  from  north  to  south  is  gradual,  as  already 
stated. 

As  to  the  direction  of  the  lateral  scale  rows,  one  discovers  that 
there  is  a  tendency  toward  the  reduction  of  interpolated  scale  rows 
following  the  axilla  in  going  south,  so  that  the  diagonal  tends  more 
toward  the  horizontal  than  the  vertical;  in  the  southwest  this  tend- 
ency is  carried  to  such  a  point  that  in  many  individuals  the  lateral 
rows  are  distinctly  parallel  to  the  dorsal.  This  is  true  in  perhaps  20 
percent  of  the  specimens  from  Arizona,  particularly  those  from  the 
Huachuca  and  the  Santa  Catalina  Mountains. 

It  is  obvious  that  we  have  to  do  with  subspecies  or  species  in  the 
making,  but  separable  lines  have  as  yet  to  be  strengthened  before 
subspecific  forms  can  be  defined  clearly  enough  to  avoid  confusion. 
At  least,  such  is  my  opinion. 

Distribution.  Eumeces  obsoletus  occurs  throughout  most  of  the 
central  western  states  and  into  northern  Mexico.  Nebraska  appears 
to  be  the  northernmost  limit,  while  in  the  south,  Santa  Caterina, 
Nuevo  Leon,  is  the  most  southerly  locality  record.  The  eastern 
records  for  "central  and  southern  Illinois"  (Davis  and  Rice,  1883), 
I  believe,  should  be  questioned  until  further  evidence  of  its  presence 
there  is  noted.  I  believe  the  form  has  not  been  reported  from 
Missouri,  but  it  most  likely  occurs  along  the  western  border,  having 
been  captured  in  adjoining  counties  in  Kansas.  The  record  for 
Arkansas  (Baird,  1859,  p.  39)  may  be  regarded  as  doubtful,  al- 
though it  may  occur  along  the  western  part.    The  name  "Arkansas" 


Taylor:    The  Gknis   Kimeces 


317 


may  refer  to  the  river.  In  the  west  it  occurs  certainly  in  Arizona 
and  Colorado,  but  the  single  record  for  Utah  (Yarrow,  1882)  has 
been  questioned.  Woodbury  tllWh  does  not  include  it  in  the  state 
fauna.  It  seems  quite  likely  that  this  is  a  correct  record.  The 
specimen  (No.  8180  U.S.N.M.)  was  apparently  collected  by  Yarrow 
himself,  but  no  definite  locality  is  indicated. 

I  have  found  the  species  everywhere  either  rare  or  very  difficult 
to  find  and  collect,  with  the  exception  of  eastern  Kansas.  Here  it  is 
not  difficult  to  obtain,  for  I  have  collected  two  or  three  dozen  in- 
dividuals of  this  species  in  one  day — a  number  which  I  have  scarcely 
totaled  in  nearly  a  half-year's  collecting  in  the  southwestern  part 
of  its  range.  It  is  possible  that  different  habits  and  habitat  make 
them  more  difficult  to  capture  there. 


Fig.  48.   Distribution  of  Eumeces  obsoletus  (Baird  and  Girard),  in 

Central  United  States. 


318  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Locality  records: 
Arizona  : 

Cochise    Co.:    Huachuca   Mts.    (Mich.  U.   9)    (M.C.Z.   2)    (C.A.S.   5); 

Moctezuma    Canon,    Huachuca    Mts.     (Mich.    U.    1)     (M.C.Z.    1) 

(A.M.N.H.  1);  Ash  Creek  (?  Canon,  Huachuca  Mts.)   (U.S.N.M.  1); 

Can-  Canon,   Huachuca  Mts.   (A.M.N.H.   1)    (A.N.S.P.  3);   Ramsey 

Canon,    Huachuca    Mts.    (L.M.K.    1)    (M.C.Z.    1)    (S.D.S.N.H.   2); 

Pinny  Canon  floor,  Chiricahua  Mts.  (U.  of  Cal.  1) ;  Cave  Creek  (U. 

of  Cal.  1). 
Pima    Co.:     Sabino    Canon,    Santa    Catalina    Mts.    (K.U.    1);    Tucson 

(U.S.N.M.  1). 
Graham  Co.:    Fort  Grant  (Stanford  1). 

Yavapai  Co.:   Prescott  (U.S.N.M.  1);  Fort  Whipple  (Coues,  1875). 
Indeterminate   localities:     Cave   spring    (Yarrow,   1875);    Arizona    (U.S. 

N.M.  4). 

New  Mexico: 

Dona  Ana  Co.:    One  mile  west  Las  Cruces  (M.C.Z.  1);  Fort  Fillmore 

(A.N.S.P.  1). 
Socorro  Co.:   Fort  Craig  (M.C.Z.  1). 
Valencia  Co.:   Grants  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Bernalillo  Co.:   Albuquerque  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Eddy  Co.:   Guadalupe  Mts.  (Mich.  U.  7) ;  Carlsbad  (K.U.  1). 
Taos  Co.:   Taos  (K.U.  1). 
Catron  Co.:   Near  Glenwood  (K.U.  2). 
Unidentified  locality:   Bero  Springs  (Coues,  1875). 

Utah:   Only  record  from  "Utah";  collected  by  Yarrow  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Nebraska:   Only  record  "Platte  river"  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Arkansas:   Upper  Arkansas  (U.S.N.M.  1) ;  Coal  Creek,  Arkansas  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

(These  localities  may  refer  to  the  Arkansas  river.) 
Colorado  : 

Larimer  Co.:   Four  miles  east  of  Wellington  (Ellis  and  Henderson,  1913). 

Weld   Co.:     Near   Greeley    (Ellis   and    Henderson,    1913);    Greasewood 
Lake,  S.  E.  Osgood  (Ellis  and  Henderson,  1913). 

Las  Animas  Co.:   Corrizo  Creek  (Ellis  and  Henderson,  1913). 

(These  Colorado  localities  have  not  been  verified.) 

Kansas  : 

Leavenworth  Co.:   North  of  Lawrence  (K.U.  15)  (Cornell  5). 

Jefferson  Co.:  North  of  Lawrence  (K.U.  8). 

Douglas  Co.:    (A.N.S.P.  2) ;  near  McLouth  (K.U.  30)  (Mich.  U.  1). 

Franklin  Co.:  Near  Ottawa  (Mich.  U.  5)  (Ottawa  U.  19). 

Anderson  Co.:   North  of  Garnett  (K.U.  45) ;  Hyatt  (K.U.  18). 

Bourbon  Co.:   (Mich.  U.  5). 

Johnson  Co.:    (Carnegie  3). 

Miami  Co.:   (Carnegie  1) ;  Haverhill  (Carnegie  1). 

Allen  Co.:    (K.U.  3). 

Montgomery  Co.:  Independence  (K.U.  2). 

Woodson  Co.:    (K.U.  2). 

Shawnee  Co.:  Topeka  (U.S.N.M.  1). 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumei    -  319 

WUsonCo.:   (K.U.4);  Neodesha  i  A. MX. II.  1). 

Osage  Co.:   (K.U.  8)  (U.S.N.M.  1);  Burlingame  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Elk  Co.:    (K.U.  2). 

ood  Co.:   Near  Toronto  (K.U.  ID. 
Wab  Co.:   Wabaunsee  (U.S.N.M.  I);  Maplehill  (U.S.N.M.  2). 

Pottawatomie  Co.:   (K.U.  5)  (Mich.  U.  13) ;  Rocky  Ford  Power  Planl 

(U.S.N.M.  1). 
Marshall  Co.:   Waterville  (A.M.N.H.  1)  (Field  1)  (Mich.  U.  1);  Irving 

(Mich.  U.  2). 
Washington  Co.:   (Mich.  3) ;  Barnes  (Field  1). 
Riley  Co.:    (K.U.  18)    (Mich.  U.   17)    (Ottawa  U.   14)    (A.M.N.H.  5) 

(Cornell  1). 
Geary  Co.:    (K.U.  1);   Fori   Riley  (A.N.S.P.  7);  Junction  City  (K.U.  4) 

(U.S.N.M.  1). 
Chas<  Co.:  Cottonwood  Falls  (M.C.Z.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  12)  (Mich.U.l); 

Strong  City  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Dickinson  Co.:   Carrelton  (K.U.  8). 
Marion  Co.:     (K.U.  4);   Florence   (K.U.  4);   7  miles  .south   of   Marion 

(A.M.N.H.  1)  ;  Marion  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Butler   Co.:     (Carnegie    1);    Chelsea    (U.S.N.M.    1);    Havenhill    (A.M. 

N.H.  1). 
Cowley  Co.:    Winfield  (Field  1)   (M.C.Z.  1)   (U.S.N.M.  14);   Arkansas 

City  (K.U.  5). 
Sumner  Co.:    (Burt.  1928). 
McPherson  Co.:    (Burt,  1928). 
Saline  Co.:   (K.U.  1). 

Ottawa  Co.:    (K.U.  8)  (Mich.  U.  1);  Minneapolis  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
Republic  Co.:   (Ottawa  U.  1). 
Ellsworth  Co.:    (M.C.Z.  1). 
Barber  Co.:    (K.U.  1). 
Russell  Co.:    (K.U.  1). 
Ellis  Co.:  Hays  (K.U.  4). 
Cloud  Co.:  South  of  Miltonville  (K.U.  14). 
Clark  Co.:  Ashland  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
Clay  Co.:   Clay  Center  (K.U.  1). 
Morton  Co.:   Walsh's  Ranch  (K.U.  1). 
Hamilton  Co.:    (Burt,  1928). 
Morris  Co.:  Council  Grove  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Jewell  Co.:   Mankato  (U.  S.  N.  M.  1). 

Oklahoma: 

Woods  Co.:   Alva  (K.U.  1)  (M.C.Z.  2). 

Comanche  Co.:    (Okla.  U.  7)  (Mich.  U.  1). 

Tulsa  Co.:   (Okla.  U.  7)  (Mich.  U.  2). 

Alfalfa  Co.:    (Okla.  U.  2). 

Murray  Co.:    (Okla.  U.  2)  (K.  U.  1.  with  eggs). 

Custer  Co.:   (Okla.  U.  1). 

Cimarron  Co.:   8  miles  SW  Boise  City  (Okla.  U.  3)  ;  near  Kenton 

(Denver  Mus.  1). 
Kay  Co.:   (Okla.  U.  3) ;  Newkirk  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Harper  Co.:    (Okla.  U.  1). 


320  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

Pawnee  Co.:   Quay  (Ortenburger,  1930). 
Osage  Co.:   Avant  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Stevens  Co.:   Alma  (U.S.N.M.  5). 

Texas  : 

Brewster  Co.:    (Mich.  U.  1) ;  Chisos  Mts.  (Mich.  U.  1)  (Taylor  1). 

Jeff  Davis  Co.:    Cherry  Canon,  Jeff  Davis  Mts.   (Mich.  U.  1);  Davis 

Mts.  (Mich.  U.  1)  (Baylor  1);  20  miles  SE  Toyahival,  5,000  ft.  elev. 

(Bailey,  1905). 
Culberson  Co.:    Guadalupe  Mts.,  6,800  ft.  (Bailey,  1915);  near  Frijoles, 

Guadalupe  Mts.  (Mich.  U.  4). 
Cameron  Co.:  Brownsville  (Field  1)  (K.U.  5). 
Starr  Co.:  Rio  Grande  City  (Taylor-Smith  1). 
McLennan  Co.:    McGregor  (Strecker,  1908);  Tonkaway  Creek  (Baylor 

4);  Bluff  Creek  (Baylor  1). 
Burnett  Co.:   Atkinson  Ranch,  near  mouth  of  Spring  Creek  (Baylor  1). 
Mitchell  Co.:   Colorado  (Baylor  1). 
Wilbarger  Co.:   Harrold  (Baylor  1);  Vernon  (Baylor  1). 
Travis  Co.:    (Strecker,  1930). 
Potter  Co.:   Near  Amarillo  (Mich.  U.  2). 
Duvall  Co.:   San  Diego  (Phila.  7)  (Taylor-Smith  7)  (Brit.  Mus.  many); 

near  Hebronville  (Mich.  U.  3). 
Valverde  Co.:  Valley  Rio  San  Pedro  (U.S.N.M.  1;  type). 
Bexar  Co.:  Helotes  (Phila.  1)  (Baylor  5). 
Reeve  Co.:  Pecos  (Phila.  5). 
El  Paso  Co.:   El  Paso  (Field  1)  (Senckenberg  3) ;  San  Elizario 

(U.S.N.M.  1). 
Eastland  Co.:   Eastland  (K.U.  1). 
Howard  Co.:   Big  Springs  (Cope,  1892). 
Hidalgo  Co.:   Edinburg  (Cornell  2). 

Mexico  : 

Tamaidipas:    (U.S.N.M.  1);  Matamoros  (U.S.N.M.  2). 
Nuevo  Leon:  Santa  Caterina  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Chihuahua:   City  of  Chihuahua  (U.S.N.M.  1). 

Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  (Gray) 

(Plate  25,  Fig-*.   2,  3;    Figs.   40,  50) 
SYNONYMY 

1838.  Tiliqua  chinensis  Gray.  Ann.  Mag.  Nat.  Hist.,  II,  1838,  p.  289  (brief  type  descrip- 
tion;  type  locality,  "China"). 

1839.  Plestiodon  sinense  Dumeril  and  Bibron.  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  p.  704  (description; 
Canton;  Tiliqua  chinensis  is  given  as  a  synonym);  Hallowell,  Proc.  Acad.  Nat.  Sci. 
Phil.,  1856,  p.  154  (Ningpo);  and  Trans.  Amer.  Philos.  Soc,  XI,  New  Series,  1860, 
pp.   81,  82   (practically  identical  to  the  preceding  paper). 

1845.  Plestiodon  chinensis  Gray.  Cat.  Spec.  Liz.  Coll.  Brit.  Mus.,  1845,  p.  92  (China, 
Reeves  Coll.). 

1864.  Mabouia  chinensis  Giinther.  Rept.  Brit.  India,  1864,  p.  83  (part.);  Swinhoe,  Proc. 
Zool.  Soc.  London,  1870,  p.  239  (Hainan,  China,  south  of  the  Yangtsze,  Formosa  and 
Pescadores)  (part.);  and  idem,  p.  410  (Pescadores);  Boettger,  Offenb.  Ver.  fur 
Naturk,  pp.   24,  25.  1882-1884,  pp.   119,  144   (Canton,  Chekiang,  Formosa). 

?1866.  Plestiodon  quinquelincatum.  Theobald.  Cat.  Rept.  Mus.  Asiat.  Soc.  Bengal,  1866 
(extra  number  CXLVI),  p.  25. 

1879.     Eumeces  sinensis  Bocourt,     Miss.  Sci.   Mex.,  Rept.,  Liv.  6,   1879,  p.   423. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  321 

Eumeces  chinensis  Miiller.  Ver.  Naturf.  Ges.  Basel,  VI,  pp.  659-709;  Blanford,  Proc. 
Z06I.  Soc  London,  L881,  pp.  216,  217  (specimen  ol  doubtful  locality);  Boulenger,  Cat. 
Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  III.  1.887,  p.  375  (Ningpo,  Chusan,  Si  Kiang,  Canton,  Hongkong); 
Boettger,  Cat.  Rept.-Samm.  Mus  Senckenb.  Natur.  Gesell.,  Teil  I,  1893,  p.  ill 
hai,    Hongkong,    Da-lan-shan    bei    Ningpo,    Canton);     Boettger,     I  nckenb. 

Natur.  Ges.  Frankfort,  L894,  pp.  132,  143,  146;  Flower,  Proc.  Zool.  Soc.  London, 
L896,   p    B76  m!. ink-  Blanford'       1881  len  is  from  China);   Stejneger,  Jour.  Sci. 

('nil..  Tokyo,  XII,  pi.  :;.  1898,  p.  220  (Taipa,  Formosa);  Werner,  Abh.  K  Bayei  Stat. 
Ucad.  Wi^..  II.  Kl.  XXII,  Bd.,  II  Abh.,  1903,  p.  262  (Kiangsi,  Chekiang,  Kuangtung, 
Kwangsi);  Stejneger,  Bull.  U.  S.  Mat,  Mus.,  No.  58,  L907,  p.  208,  fig.  185  (descrip- 
tion); Van  Denburgh,  Proc  Cal.  Acad.  Sci.,  (4),  III.  Dec.  L6,  1912,  pp.  225,  226 
(Shanghai);  Vogt,  Sits.  Ber.  Ges.  Naturf.  Freunde,  Berlin,  1914,  p.  100  (Canton); 
Vogt,  \r,h.  Naturg.,  BS  .lain..  10  Heft,  Un.  V.  Dec,  L922,  pp.  135-146;  Smith, 
Jour.  Nat.  II  -  Siam,  VI,  No.  2.  Oct.  31,  1923,  p.  20  (Hainan);  Vogt,  Zool.  Anz., 
60,  1024,  p.  33S  ("Oberes  Mintal,  Man  Tschow,"  Canton);   Sun.  Cent.   Biol.  Lab.  Sci. 

Sue.  Chma.  II.  No.  2,   1926,  pp.  6,  7  ("Amoy  up  to  Nanking");   Stejneger,   I' I'.  S. 

Nat.  Mus..  66,  Art.  25,  1926,  p.  47  (Fukien,  Shanghai);  Schmidt.  Bull.  Amer.  Mus. 
Nat.  Hist.,  r»4.  Art.  4.  1027.  p.  503  (Futsing,  Fukien;  Yen]. inn.  Fukien;  Yenchingkan, 
Wahnsien,  Szechwan);  Tchang,  Bull.  Fan  Mem.  Inst..  II,  No.  14,  Dec-.,  1931,  p.  277 
(Nanking;  southern  Chma):  Fan,  Bull.  Dept.  Coll.  Sci.,  Sun  Vat  Sen  Univ.,  May, 
1931,  p.  38  (description,  noting  variation;  Loshiang  and  Kutchen,  Yaoshan,  Kwangsi); 
Pope.  Bull.  Amer.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  58,  Sept.  7.  1929,  pp.  384-387,  fig.  2;  Gee,  Bull. 
Dep.  Biol.  Yenching  Univ.,  T.  1929-1930,  (Jan.,  1930),  pp.  53-84  (list,  with  records 
from  literature):  Ahl,  Sitzb.  Ges.  Natur.  Freunde.  Berlin,  1030,  pp.  326-331  (Kwangsi); 
Boring,  First  Ann.  Kept.  M.B.A.C,  1932,  p.  112  (Fukien  records);  ?Pavlov,  Pub. 
Mus.  Hoangho  Pai  ho,  No.  12.  1932,  p.  8  ("Song  Chow  tchoeize,  Mongolie  Or  le."). 
1012.  Eumeces  chinensis  formosensis  Van  Denburgh.  -Adv.  Diag.  New  Rept.  Amph.  Loo 
Choo  Is.  Formosa,  private  printing  Aug.  7,  1012.  p.  1  (type  description):  and  Proc. 
Calif.  Aead.  Sci.,  (4),  III,  1912,  pp.  226,  227  (type  locality  San  Shi  Ka,  Formosa; 
ether  localities,  Taipeh   and  Keelung). 

History.  From  the  literature  of  this  species  I  am  unable  to  learn 
the  history  of  the  type.  Gray's  (1838)  record,  ''China,  British 
Museum''  is  all  that  appears  to  be  known,  unless  his  notice  in  the 
Catalogue  (1845)  refers  to  the  same  specimen.  This  hardly  seems 
likely,  due  to  the  fact  that  the  latter  Chinese  specimen  is  colored 
differently.  This  specimen  is  credited  to  J.  Reeves  (Boulenger's 
Catalogue,  1887). 

Gray  bestowed  the  name,  Tiliqua  chinensis.  The  following  year 
Dumeril  and  Bibron  (1838)  use  the  name  Plestiodon  sinense,  recog- 
nizing in  the  synonymy,  Tiliqua  sinensis  Gray  (Illus.  Ind.  Zoolog. 
Hardwick,  and  Cat.  1838),  and  EupreyAs  d'  Hardwick  Cocteau 
(Tabl.  Synop.  Seine.)  (I  have  not  seen  the  first  and  last  mentioned 
papers).  They  list  three  specimens  from  China,  presented  by  the 
French  consul,  M.  Gernaert,  at  Canton.  Cantor  (1842)  described 
a  Chinese  skink  under  the  name  Tiliqiui  rufo-guttata.  This  speci- 
men is  listed  by  Boulenger  (1887)  as  specimen  "C,  Adult,  Chusan, 
Dr.  Cantor,  Type  of  Tiliqua  rufo-guttata."  Schmidt  (1927)  offers 
the  opinion  that  this  should  properly  be  regarded  as  a  synonym  of 
E.  pulcher. 

The  Chinese  skink  long  remained  a  rarity  in  collections,  but  in 
recent  years  a  large  number  of  specimens  have  been  collected,  the 
21—1123 


322  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

largest  series  being  that  accumulated  in  Fukien  by  Clifford  Pope 
(Pope,  1929),  a  series  which  numbered  147  specimens. 

The  exact  relationship  between  this  form  and  pulcher  is  still  un- 
certain. The  northern  form  pulcher  appears  to  be  confined  to  the 
provinces  that  border  the  Yangtze  river,  while  the  typical  chinensis 
occupies  the  provinces  to  the  south.  Whether  there  is  a  territory 
between  these  two  areas  where  the  forms  are  indistinguishable  from 
each  other,  is  not  definitely  known;  but  the  probability  that  such 
is  the  case  seems  quite  likely. 

Diagnosis.  A  large-sized  skink  having  a  somewhat  typical  five- 
lined  coloration,  the  median  light  line  apparently  not  bifurcating 
on  the  head ;  the  dorsolateral  line  is  continuous,  arising  on  the  supra- 
oculars; the  lateral  line  is  broken  up  into  spots,  with  other  scattered 
light  spots  both  above  and  below  it. 

Normally  no  postnasal;  two  pairs  of  nuchals,  and  two  post- 
mentals;  the  lower  secondary  temporal  is  large,  more  or  less  fan- 
shaped;  subcaudals  widened.  Limbs  elongate,  usually  overlapping 
when  adpressed.  Scale  rows  normally  24,  rarely  22  or  26;  seven 
upper  labials  (rarely  6).  Frontal  normally  shorter  than  its  dis- 
tance from  the  end  of  the  snout,  in  contact  normally  with  only  two 
supraoculars. 

Description  of  the  species.  Rostral  large,  the  part  appearing 
above  usually  a  little  smaller  than  the  frontonasal  (rarely  larger)  ; 
supranasals  relatively  small,  only  very  little  longer  than  wide, 
in  contact  medially;  frontonasal  normally  separated  from  frontal 
(rarely  in  contact),  in  contact  usually  with  the  anterior  loreals 
(rarely  separated) ;  prefrontals  normally  much  larger  than  supra- 
nasals, forming  a  median  suture;  frontal  relatively  short,  normally 
shorter  than  its  distance  from  the  end  of  the  snout,  normally  in 
contact  with  only  two  supraoculars  (occasionally  with  three) ;  fron- 
toparietals usually  larger  than  the  prefrontals,  forming  a  long  me- 
dian suture;  interparietal  typical,  usually  of  smaller  area  than  the 
frontoparietals,  in  contact  with  the  nuchal,  separating  the  parietals; 
latter  scales  typical,  longer  than  wide.  Normally  two  pairs  of 
nuchals  (frequently  one  or  occasionally  three). 

Nasal  rather  small,  apparently  completely  divided  by  a  suture; 
normally  lacking  a  postnasal  (one  rarely  present)  ;  anterior  loreal 
higher  than  wide,  only  slightly  higher  than  the  posterior;  latter  a 
little  longer  than  high,  usually  touching  three  labials;  two  presub- 
oculars;  four  postsuboculars  (rarely  five)  ;  one  small  preocular,  fol- 
lowed by  a  diminishing  series  of  minute  scales;  two  small  postocu- 


Taylor:    The  Gkxi  s  Ki-mkcks 


323 


lars,  the  lower  larger;  four  supraoculars,  the  second  proportionally 
very  large,  the  first  and  second  in  contact  with  frontal  (rarely  also 
the  third)  ;  normally  eight  superciliaries,  the  anterior  about  2  to  2? 
times  as  large  as  last;  upper  median  palpebral  scales  in  contact  with 
the  superciliaries;  lower  eyelid  with  several  enlarged  plates,  sepa- 
rated from  the  subocular  by  two  granular  scale  rows.  Primary 
temporal  relatively  small;  upper  secondary  temporal  elongate,  some- 
what wider  posteriorly  than  anteriorly;  lower  secondary  nearly  or 
equally  as  large  as  upper,  the  upper  end  widened  more  than  pos- 
terior, touching  the  primary  temporal;  tertiary  temporal  narrow, 
elongated,  sometimes  broken  into  two  parts,  occasionally  entering 
ear. 


Fig.  49.  Eumcces  chim  nsis  chinensis  (Gray).  K.U.  No.  9095;  Foochow, 
Fukien,  China.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  21  mm.;  width,  21  mm. 

The  scales  following  the  upper  secondary  temporals  lacking  the 
uniform  differentiation  of  these  scales  in  the  elegans  group;  seven 
upper  labials  normally  (frequently  six),  the  last  of  the  series  largest. 
The  first  is  distinctly  larger  and  higher  than  the  three  following 
(when  only  six.  it  may  be  slightly  smaller  than  the  one  following)  ; 
usually  two  postlabials,  equal,  or  lower  largest;  two  or  three  incon- 
spicuous auricular  lobules;  usually  six  lower  labials;  mental  mod- 
erate, with  a  labial  border  only  slightly  longer  than  that  of  the 
rostral;  two  postmentals,  the  anterior  narrow;  three  pairs  of  chin- 
shields;  a  large  postgenial,  the  scales  bordering  inner  edge  much 
longer  than  wide;  ear  rather  small,  surrounded  by  18-20  scales. 

Scales  around  the  neck  behind  ear,  32-34;  around  narrow  part  of 


324  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

neck,  26-29,  28  appearing  most  frequently;  scales  around  body, 
22-26,  normally  24.  Subcaudals  widened,  about  90  from  vent  to 
tip  of  tail;  eight  preanal  scales,  the  medians  enlarged,  the  laterals 
diminishing  in  size,  the  outer  overlapping  inner;  the  lateral  postanal 
not  or  but  slightly  differentiated,  lacking  all  trace  of  a  keel. 

Limbs  large,  well-developed,  overlapping  a  few  millimeters  when 
adpressed;  thirteen  or  fourteen  scales  about  the  insertion  of  fore- 
arm; a  pair  of  well  differentiated  wrist  tubercles;  a  group  of  at  least 
six  padlike  palmar  tubercles,  the  posterior  largest;  lamellar  formula 
for  fingers;  5;  9;  12;  11;  6.  About  18  scales  around  insertion  of 
hind  limb;  no  trace  of  a  patch  of  enlarged,  differentiated  scales  on 
posterior  part  of  the  femoral  region ;  two  pairs  of  large  padlike  heel 
plates,  the  posterior  of  each  pair  largest,  sometimes  separated;  the 
enlarged  tubercles  tend  to  arrange  themselves  longitudinally  in  two 
rows  passing  toward  the  base  of  the  fourth  finger.  Lamellar  formula 
for  the  toes:  5;  9;  12;  17;  9;  intercalated  row  of  scales  on  fourth 
toe  only  on  basal  phalanx;  terminal  lamellae  not  tightly  bound 
about  claws;  a  group  of  small  axillary  scales,  these  usually  imbri- 
cate; no  small  scales  behind  the  insertion  of  hind  leg. 

Color  (in  alcohol).  Young  (snout  to  vent,  45  mm.),  dark  blackish 
with  a  median  cream  or  white  line  from  posterior  part  of  the  inter- 
parietal. Dorsolateral  line  begins  on  the  last  supraocular,  and  fol- 
lows the  edges  of  the  second  and  third  scale  rows  onto  the  tail, 
continuous  (or  very  rarely  broken)  ;  anteriorly  the  edges  of  the  first 
and  second  scale  rows  with  lighter  edges,  not  appearing  as  a  line; 
upper  and  lower  labials  with  cream  dark-edged  spots,  also  one  on 
the  tertiary  temporal;  on  top  of  head  each  scale  with  a  brown  area, 
these  areas  bordered  with  black;  sides  with  three  rows  of  cream  or 
white  spots  extending  to  the  ear,  each  spot  covering  one  or  two 
scales.  Tail  bluish;  chinshields  light,  edged  with  slightly  darker 
color;  throat,  breast,  and  undersurface  of  limbs  light;  belly  grayish. 

In  older  specimens  there  is  a  diminution  in  the  distinctness  of  the 
light  lines  until,  in  the  male  specimens,  the  color  becomes  olive, 
brown-olive,  or  brown,  and  all  trace  of  the  juvenile  pattern  is  ob- 
literated. In  these  older  specimens  the  head  tends  to  become  a 
uniform  yellow-brown  (reddish  in  life).  There  is  usually  a  darker 
lateral  stripe  that  may  be  more  or  less  continuous,  but  which  grows 
less  distinct  as  older  age  is  reached,  until  practically  no  trace  is 
left,  or  it  may  form  disconnected,  irregular,  dark  spots;  in  this 
darker  area,  traces  of  the  lateral  light  spots  may  persist  for  many 
years  and  in  males  many  of  the  scales  become  reddish,  especially 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


325 


in  the  neck  region.  In  females  the  lines  are  retained  a  little  longer, 
and  in  old  age,  when  the  lines  are  lost,  often  the  scales  on  the  back 
retain  darker  edges. 

Measurements  of  Eumeces  chiru  nsis  chinensis  (Graj 


M  C.Z. 

29001 

cf 

M.C.Z. 

29007 
cf 

M.C.Z. 

29005 

cf 

M.C.Z. 
29008 

9 

M.C.Z. 

29003 

cf 

M.C.Z. 
290'  14 

cf 

M.C.Z 

29002 

cf 

M.C.Z. 

Number    

29006 

S.^x 

yg- 

Snout  (o  vent 

119 

108 

His 

10) 

105 

96 

74 

45 

Tail 

Snout  to  foreleg. . . . 

39 

34 

36 

33 

32 

31 

23 

16 

Snout  to  eye 

9.5 

0 

9 

8 

8  :• 

7 

.5 

11  to  ear 

'_'.-> 

22 

22   5 

18.6 

IS. 2 

18 

11 

9.5 

\x'lla  to  groin 

62 

56 

53 

53 

55 

53 

41 

23 

Width  of  head 

19 

18 

18 

15 

IS 

15 

11 

8 

Length  of  head  .... 

21 

18  5 

19 

16.2 

20 

15 

18 

9 

Width  of  body 

21 

22 

19 

21 

20 

19 

16 

9 

Foreleg 

28 

20 

2.5 

26 

26 

25 

20 

12 

Hind  leg 

41 
13 

36 
12 

33 

11 

34 
12 

36 
11 

33 

11 

26 
10 

17 

Longest  toe 

5 

All  specimens  from  Fung-li,  Chekiang,   China. 

Variation.  As  is  expected,  Eumeces  chinensis  varies  considerably 
in  the  details  of  squamation,  but  the  percentages  are  such  that  the 
norm  of  a  character  is  easily  discerned.  One  difficulty  has  obtruded 
itself,  and  that  is  the  lack  of  certainty  in  the  determinations  of 
forms  reported  in  literature.  Fortunately  Mr.  Pope's  large  series 
was  available  for  study  and  it  was  possible  to  arrive  at  a  rather 
accurate  estimate  of  variation  obtaining  in  Fukien  Province.  Little 
that  is  new  is  added  to  the  already  published  data  of  Schmidt  (1927) 
and  Pope  (1929)  on  this  series. 

Scale  counts  are  available  on  201  specimens.  Of  these,  182  have 
21  rows  about  the  middle  of  the  body;  2  have  23;  5  have  25;  and 
15  have  26.  Malcolm  Smith  (1923)  notes  22  rows  on  a  specimen 
from  Hainan.  The  variation  in  the  scales  in  middorsal  rows  from 
parietals  to  above  the  vent  is  from  50  to  55,  the  numbers  51-53 
occurring  with  greatest  frequency.  In  about  200  specimens  ex- 
amined, a  postnasal  occurs  on  one  or  both  sides  only  12  times,  and 
the  postmental  is  single  in  only  8  cases.  The  second  postmental 
in  10  cases  was  abnormal,  either  vertically  split,  or  united  to  one 
or  the  other  of  the  chinshields.  The  nuchals  were  normally  2-2  in 
about  77  percent  of  the  cases,  the  remainder  had  the  nuchals  2-1 


826  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

or  1-1.  The  constancy  of  the  prefrontal  suture  (separating  fron- 
tonasal and  frontal)  is  greater  than  in  all  other  species  of  which 
large  series  are  available,  except  Eumeces  laticeps.  The  number  of 
supraoculars  touching  the  frontal  shows  great  instability;  two  touch 
the  frontal  more  frequently  than  three,  the  percentage  being  ap- 
proximately 64  and  36,  respectively.  Detailed  counts  of  subdigital 
lamellae  of  the  fourth  toe  were  not  made  on  all  of  the  specimens, 
but  in  some  fifty  specimens  the  number  16  occurred  in  72  percent 
and  17  in  about  18  percent.  The  limbs  touch  or  overlap  when  ad- 
pressed  in  practically  all  specimens.  However,  if  the  specimen  is 
stiffened  or  shrunken,  they  may  fail  slightly  to  touch.  The  limbs 
are  longer  in  the  young  in  proportion  to  the  axilla  to  groin  distance. 

A  few  other  scales  showed  an  occasional  tendency  to  split.  In 
four  specimens  one  or  both  prefrontals  were  broken.  The  tertiary 
temporal  was  segmented  in  several  cases.  On  the  whole  the  tem- 
porals were  very  constant,  as  was  the  presence  of  the  single  pair  of 
postlabials.  The  superciliaries  were  usually  eight  or  nine,  eight 
predominating. 

Fan  (1931)  reports  on  21  specimens  from  Yaoshan  (Loshiang 
and  Kutchen)  in  which  nine  have  a  postnasal  on  both,  three  on 
one  side.  His  statement  "usually  5-5  supraoculars"  is  probably 
an  error  due  to  counting  the  last  superciliary. 

Re?narks.  In  the  collection  of  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sciences, 
Philadelphia,  is  a  specimen  purporting  to  be  from  Java.  The  speci- 
men is  old  and  accurate  measurements  could  not  be  made.  There 
were  but  48  scales  from  parietals  to  above  vent,  and  but  22  scale 
rows  about  the  body.  In  other  characters  discerned  it  appeared  to 
be  typical.    The  locality  I  believe  is  erroneous. 

The  absence  of  large  series  from  the  more  western  provinces 
makes  it  difficult  to  estimate  the  true  relationship  of  this  form  with 
Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher.  In  Chekiang  both  forms  occur.  Those 
in  the  northern  part  along  Hangchow  bay  appear  to  have  the  typical 
adult  coloration  of  pulcher,  while  those  in  the  central  and  southern 
parts  are  typically  chinensis.  One  specimen  from  Kangpu  or 
Wusung,  Hangchow  Bay  (U.S.N.M.  72916,  Sowerby  Coll.)  has 
limbs  which  overlap  the  length  of  two  scales;  while  in  other  typical 
pulcher  the  limbs  are  relatively  shorter  and  fail  to  overlap  save  in 
the  very  young. 

The  status  of  Cantor's  Tiliqua  rufo-guttata  is  likewise  in  doubt. 
It  comes  from  an  island  in  the  Chusan  archipelago  lying  off  the 
Chekiang  coast,  and  might  be  either  chinensis  or  pulcher. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


327 


Mr.  Clifford  Pope,  who  is  personally  familiar  with  the  habitats 
of  the  two  forms,  suggests  thai  ch/inensis  is  a  typical  mountain 
form,  while  pulcher  is  a  plains,  open  field,  or  river  valley  form. 
However,  Sun  (1926)  reports  specimens  from  near  Nanking  (pre- 
sumably pulcher)  from  the  slopes  of  Purple  Mountain.  Schmidt 
11927 1  suggests  that  future  investigations  may  prove  the  two 
worthy  of  only  subspecifie  rank. 

Distribution.  In  general  this  form  is  confined  to  the  southeastern 
third  of  China.    There  are,  so  far  as  I  know,  not  any  records  of  the 


Fig.  50.   Distribution  of  the  species  of  the  Obsoletus  group,  in 

Eastern  Asia. 

species  in  Kweichow  or  Yunnan,  nor  authentic  records  in  provinces 
lying  to  the  north  of  those  provinces  in  the  valley  of  the  Yangtze 
river.  Many  literature  records  are  omitted  here,  due  to  the  un- 
certainty of  identification. 

Locality  records: 

China:    (Brit.  Mus.  2). 

Kwangsi:  (Ahl,  1930)  (Werner,  1903,  17  spec.) ;  Yaoshan  (Fan,  1931,  21 
spec). 

Kwangtung :  (Werner,  1903,  10  spec);  Hongkong  (Boettger,  1893)  (Brit. 
Mus.  3);  Lilong  (Boettger,  1882);  Sikiang  (Brit.  Mus.  1);  Canton 
(Vogt,  1924)  (Mell,  1922)  (Boettger,  1894)  (Brit,  Mus.  1);  Hainan 
(Boettger,  1894) ;  Hainan,  The  Hummocks.  25  km.  from  Hoi-hao 
(Smith,  1923,  1  spec). 


328  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

?  Szechwan:  Yenchingkau,  Wahnsien  (A.M.N.H.  1);  "Man  Tschow" 
upper  valley  of  Mm  river  (Vogt,  1924,  2  spec). 

Kiangsi:    (M.C.Z.  1,  Gordon  Coll.). 

Fukien:  (A.M.N.H.  5)  (Field  1);  Futsing  Hsien  (A.M.N.H.  38)  (U.S. 
N.M.  3);  Yenping  (A.M.N.H.  90) ;  Yenping  fu  (U.S.N.M.  25)  (M.C.Z. 
9) ;  Ch'ungan  Hsien  (A.M.N.H.  6) ;  Hokow  (A.M.N.H.  13) ;  Yoochow 
(U.S.N.M.  2)  (K.U.  4);  Kuliang  (U.S.N.M.  1);  Fuelling  Dist. 
(U.S.N.M.  3);  Amoy  (Field  1);  Kuatun  (Field  1). 

Chekiang:  Ningpo  (Boettger,  1894)  (Brit.  Mus.  2);  Chusan  (Brit.  Mus.; 
type  Tiliqua  rufo-guttata)  (A.N.S.P.  2) ;  Da-lanshan  near  Ningpo 
(Boettger,  1893);  Tung  li  (Mich.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  9)  (M.C.Z.  8);  near 
Mo  Kan  Shan  (Mich.  1). 

Pescadores  Islands:  ?(S\vinhoe,  1870).  (I  am  unable  to  identify  Pav- 
lov's [1932]  locality  "Songchow  Tchoeize,  Mongolie  Or  le.") 

Formosa:  San  shi  Ka  (type  locality  of  jormosensis)  (C.A.S.  1) ;  Keelung 
(C.A.S.  2);  Taipeh  (C.A.S.  1). 

Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron) 

(Plate  25,  Fig.  1;  Figs.  50,  51) 
SYNONYMY 

1839.  Plestiodon  pulchrum  Dumeril  and  Bibron.*  Erp.  Gen.,  V,  1839,  pp.  710,  711  (type 
description;  type  locality  "China");  Gray,  Cat.  Liz.  Brit.  Mus.,  1845,  p.  92  (China; 
J.  Reeves  Coll.). 

1842.  "  Tiliqua  rufo-guttata  Cantor.  Ann.  Mug.  Hist.,  IX,  1842,  p.  482  (assignment  here 
not  certain;    type  not  examined). 

1879.    Eumeces  pulchra  Bocourt.     Miss.   Sci.   Mex.,  Liv.   6,   1879,  p.   423. 

1927.  Eumeces  pulcher  Schmidt.  Bull.  Amer.  Mus.  Nat.  Hist.,  LIV,  Art.  4,  Oct.  11,  1927, 
pp.  503-505  (rehabilitation  of  the  name  pulcher  for  the  northern  Chinese  form,  with  a 
comparison  of  this  form  with  typical  chinensis);  Gee,  Bull.  Dept.  Biol.  Yenching  Univ., 
I,  1929-'30  (Jan.,  1930),  p.  63  (Hunan,  Anhwei). 

History.  The  specimen  described  by  Dumeril  and  Bibron  was 
obtained  from  the  British  Museum  ("L'echantillon  dont  il  est  ici 
question  provient  du  Musee  Britannique ;  il  nous  a  ete  donne  comme 
originaire  de  Chine")  and  may  very  probably  have  been  one  of  the 
series  collected  by  J.  Reeves,  which  likewise  bears  only  the  locality 
record  "China." 

The  original  description  states: 

"Le  Beau  Plestiodonte.   Plestiodon  pulchrum.  Nobis. 

"Caracteres.  Pas  de  plaques  f  reno-nasales ;  oreilles  vertico-ovalaires,  grandes, 
sans  lobules  a  leur  bord  anterieur;  parties  superieures  noires;  trois  lignes 
dorsales  blanches." 

Description: 

"Formes:  C'est  avec  doute,  nous  l'avouons,  que  nous  inscrivons  ici  cette 
espeoe  sous  un  autre  nom   que  celui  que  porte   le  Plestiodontet  decrit  dans 

*  Both  Dumeril  and  Gray  refer  to  the  synonymy  Tiliqua  pulchra  Gray,  Mus.  Britain, 
(non  Illus.  Ind.  Zool.),  a  reference  I  have  not  traced.  It  presumably  antedates  Dumeril  and 
Bibron's  name,  but  whether  a  nomem  nudum  I  do  not  know.  They  also  place  in  synonymy 
Tiliqua  de  Gray  Coct.   (Synopt.   Seine). 

f  Plestiodon   quinquelineatum. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Et  meces  329 

['article  precedent;  car  elle  n'en  differe  que  par  I'absence  de  plaques  freno- 
nasales  et  de  lobules  ou  de  petites  ecailles  flottantes  de  long  du  bord  anterieur 
de  son  orifice  auriculaire. 

"Coloration:  Quant  a  son  mode  de  coloration,  il  serail  le  meme  sans  deux 
raies  blanches  laterales  de  moins.  L'individu  que  nous  avons  maintenanf  sous 
les  yeux,  et  qui  est  en  tons  points  semblable  a.un  second  que  nous  avons 
observe  dans  le  museum  royal  d'Histoire  naturelle  de  Londres,  a  le  bout  du 
museau  blanc  et  les  plaques  qui  le  revetent  en  dessus  et  lateralement,  ainsi 
que  les  sus-oculaires  de  la  meme  couleur,  mais  bordees  de  noir.  La  ligne 
blanche  de  son  dos  ne  depasse  pas  1'occiput.  C'est  certainmenl  un  jeune  sujet. 
En  voici  les  principales  dimensions." 

'■Dimensions:  Longueur  totale,  8"  V" \  Tete,  long.,  8"';  Cou,  long.,  5"'; 
Tronc,  long..  2";  Memb.  anter.,  long.,  1";  raenib.  poster.,  long..  1"4"';  queue, 
Ions.,  4"S"\" 


'-■• 


That  the  authors  compared  the  species  with  " quinquelineatum" 
rather  than  with  their  Plestiodon  sinensis  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the 
type  of  P.  pulchrum  is  a  young  individual  with  juvenile  coloration- 
while  the  available  specimens  of  their  Plestiodon  Sinense  (three 
from  China)  all  appear  to  have  been  adults  and  lacking  juvenile 
markings. 

Four  years  later  Cantor  (1842)  described  a  skink  from  the  island 
of  Chusan  as  Tiliqua  rujo- guttata  as  follows:  '"Bronze-colored 
above,  with  four  black  zigzag  lines;  the  sides  pale  yellow,  with 
numerous  red  spots.    Beneath  pale  yellow." 

Bocourt  (Mission  Sci.,  Liv.  6, 1879,  p.  423)  accepts  the  two  species, 
separating  them  in  his  Tableau  synoptique  (p.  423)  on  the  basis  of 
a  single  postmental  scale  in  pulchra  and  a  double  postmental  scale 
in  sinensis;  and  on  the  differences  in  coloration. 

Boulenger  (1887)  placed  rufo-guttata,  pulchrum  and  chinensis 
in  the  single  species,  Eumeces  chinensis  (Gray). 

Schmidt  (1927)  on  the  basis  of  a  series  of  seven  specimens  col- 
lected in  China  by  Clifford  Pope,  reestablishes  the  name  pulcher 
for  the  large  skink  occurring  in  the  provinces  of  Hunan  and  Anhwei. 
He  shows  that,  save  for  the  color  differences,  the  basis  of  separation 
is  average  scale  differences.  He  states,  "This  series  differs  from  the 
Fukien  chinensis  in  a  number  of  characters,  each  insufficient  if  taken 
alone,  to  warrant  the  distinction  of  a  species  (or  a  subspecies)  but 
amounting  to  conclusive  evidence  when  taken  together." 

Besides  the  series  studied  by  Schmidt,  I  have  had  available  for 
study    four   specimens    in    the   United   States    National    Museum: 
Nos.  31720  Shanghai,  67034  Suchow,  Kiangsi,  73187,  twenty  miles 
west  of  Shanghai,  and  72916  Kangpu  or  Wusung,  Hang  Chow  Bay. 

From  my  study  I  feel  that  the  more  northern  form  of  Eumeces 


330 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


chinensis  is  worthy  of  recognition,  but  believe  it  wiser  to  assign  it 
subspecific,  rather  than  specific,  rank.  Schmidt  (1927,  p.  505) 
himself  regarded  this  as  a  probable  relationship. 

Diagnosis.  Closely  related  to  Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  (Gray) , 
having  practically  the  same  growth  pattern  and  adult  size,  but 
having  three  as  the  normal  number  of  supraoculars  touching  frontal 
(rarely  two)  ;  the  number  of  upper  labials  normally  six  (seven 
occurring  occasionally).  The  adult  females  retain  to  a  large  ex- 
tent the  juvenile  color  pattern  (less  distinct  and  occasionally  partly 
obliterated  in  males). 


Fig.  51.  Eumeces  chinensis  pulcher  (Dumeril  and  Bibron).  C.A.S.  No. 
14662,  Shanghai.  A,  lateral  view  of  head;  B,  dorsal  view  of  head.  Actual 
head  length,  approximately  11  mm.;  width,  about  10  mm. 

Description  of  species  (drawn  from  Field  M.  Nos.  7185  $  and 
7186  5  ,  Ningkwo,  Anhwei,  China).  Portion  of  rostral  visible  above 
half  the  size  of  the  frontonasal;  supranasals  relatively  short  and 
wide,  forming  a  median  suture;  frontonasal  broader  than  long,  in 
contact  with  the  anterior  loreal;  prefrontals  moderately  large,  form- 
ing a  strong  median  suture;  frontal  only  slightly  narrower  poste- 
riorly than  anteriorly,  touching  three  supraoculars  (abnormal  in 
7186,  where  the  supraoculars  are  fused  and  broken  on  the  right  side 
while  the  third  supraocular  on  the  left  side  is  minutely  separated 
from  frontal);  frontal  as  long  as  its  distance  from  end  of  snout; 
frontoparietals  about  same  size  as  prefrontals,  forming  a  median 
suture;  parietals  moderate  in  size,  not  enclosing  the  interparietal; 
nuchals  two  pairs  (in  the  male  there  are  three  on  left  side). 

Nasal  at  least  partially  divided  by  a  suture,  the  anterior  part 
smaller  than  posterior  part   (including  nostril);  no  postnasal;  an- 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Etjmeces  331 

terior  loreal  higher  than  wide,  higher  than  second,  broadly  in  con- 
tact with  first  and  second  labials;  posterior  loreal  moderate,  its 
greatest  height  usually  less  than  its  length,  touching  two  (rarely 
three)  labials;  two  presuboculars ;  tour  postsuboculars ;  a  small  pre- 
ocular.  followed  by  three  granules  diminishing  in  size;  seven  super- 
ciliaries,  the  anterior  largest,  often  as  large  as  first  supraocular; 
last  of  the  series  about  half  as  large  as  first;  two  small  postoculars, 
the  lower  largest;  upper  median  palpebral  scales  in  contact  with 
the  superciliaries ;  four  enlarged  plates  on  the  lower  lid,  separated 
by  about  three  rows  of  granules  from  the  subocular,  the  lower  row 
relatively  much  enlarged;  four  supraoculars,  three  normally  touch- 
ing the  frontal;  primary  temporal  moderate,  longer  than  wide; 
upper  secondary  large,  the  main  axis  of  the  scale  diagonal;  lower 
secondary  triangular;  tertiary  small;  six  (or  less  frequently  seven) 
upper  labials,  three  (or  four)  preceding  the  subocular;  first  dis- 
tinctly higher  than  other  scales  preceding  the  suboculars;  last  labial 
largest,  usually  much  longer  than  high,  separated  from  ear  by  a 
rather  large  postlabial,  upon  which  is  superimposed  one  (rarely 
two)  smaller  scales;  five  lower  labials;  mental  with  a  slightly  larger 
labial  border  than  rostral ;  two  postmentals  (the  second  scale  broken 
in  the  female) ;  three  pairs  of  chinshields,  the  first  pair  in  contact; 
a  well-developed  postgenial,  bordered  on  its  inner  edge  by  a  scale 
longer  than  wide. 

Scales  on  body  in  parallel  rows  except  in  axilla;  the  median  pair 
on  back  usually  a  little  larger  than  adjoining  row;  31  scales  about 
neck  behind  ear;  narrow  part  of  neck,  27;  around  body  at  axilla,  31; 
around  middle  of  body,  23-24  rows;  17  scales  about  base  of  tail. 
Pits  on  scales  distinct,  numerous  behind  ear,  sides  of  neck,  on  arm 
and  about  arm  insertion  and  axilla,  on  upper  and  posterior  side  of 
femur  and  behind  insertion  of  hind  leg;  16  scales  around  insertion 
of  arm:  two  well-developed  wrist  tubercles;  palm  with  six  or  eight 
enlarged  padlike  granules;  lamellar  formula  for  fingers:  5;  9;  11; 
10;  7.  Eighteen  scales  around  insertion  of  hind  limb;  four  padlike 
heel  tubercles  with  two  small  conical  tubercles  on  sole;  lamellar 
formula  for  toes:  6;  9;  12;  16;  10;  no  granular  scales  behind  inser- 
tion of  the  hind  leg;  an  intercalated  row  of  scales  on  digits  extend- 
ing nearly  half  the  length  of  toes  on  outer  side,  elsewhere  seldom  ex- 
tending beyond  basal  phalanx;  toes  strongly  compressed;  eight 
preanal  scales,  the  median  much  enlarged,  diminishing  in  size  on 
sides,  the  outer  scales  overlapping  inner;  ear  rather  small,  sur- 
rounded bv  about  20  scales. 


332 


The  University  Science  Bulletin 


« 


3 

kq 


io      a 

>r 

c 

u: 

■H         C 

oc 

« 

I- 

■OiO 

c 

tt 

CN 

CN 

i- 

c 

■H 

isS't 

)         ^ 

Et~ 

X 
•  co 

Z° 

CO 

o 

CN 

■n     c 

-1> 

rt 

■* 

CN1        <T- 

CO        ^H 

»— .   <-H 

<SCO 

«i 

Z° 

^1  (No 

o 

CO 

•*       CO       c 

C-l 

2 

CO 

p 

CO        i-h 

*^H  »~H 

<5C«3 

•< 

•  lO 

Z° 

00 

-p 

-t 

N       O       N 

o 

i-H 

CO 

i-H        CM        C 

■-H 

<5CO 

«i 

u: 

.- 

IT 

»— 1 

^2o 

oi      to 

t> 

c 

CO 

ir 

CO 

^H 

o 

co      **o 

■H        0)        00        iH 

cog 

p 

-* 

c\ 

^hOO 

t^ 

oc 

CO        l-O 

ifi 

co 

o     o 

© 

co      >r. 

r- 

^H       c 

CO        ^h 

y            'H 

02  to 

p 

fcrH 

1*5  f£| 

CO      to 

r- 

CN 

CO 

(X 

ce 

1C 

i-H           ^H 

oa 

co 

>r. 

I- 

—< 

o: 

I-H 

£St 

) 

a?K 

P 

ic 

co 

D 

a0 

t-     l~. 

a 

CJ        C 

IG 

-f 

-* 

CN 

IH 

Oi 

o 

T. 

I— 

o 

« 

■-H 

£r~0 

h 

ajw 

P 

z 

t 

ir 

i-O 

e»     ec 

to 

.— 

t 

CN 

u: 

OJ       o: 

T5  to 

co 

co 

I— 

"300  o 

h 

pC(t» 

In 
Z10 

>o 

tc 

o 

i- 

>c 

CNI 

00 

o 

c 

CN 

rH 

k— .  CO 

<<CS 

< 

CN 

■  to 

^"*  CM    ^ 

_| 

OJ 

a 

t". 

0 

r- 

t^ 

■■0 

0 

^"rt     > 

. 

d  CO 

<j 

b 
1 

) 

ce 

X 

a. 
> 

1 

1 

4 

a 

0) 

!> 

a. 

a. 

&i 

J       >„ 

o 

8  - 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

b 

'  n 

4i 

-t- 

43 

s» 

]       4. 

to 

«- 

+3 

*j 

-t- 

« 

j= 

.£ 

a> 

- 

5 

5 

5 

— 

a 

i    ~ 

"a 

■t 

CO 

3  ->  x 

c 

0 

C 

c 

.— 

c 

t- 

C 

a 

S2 

a 

V 

c 
a: 

c 

c 

3 

1 

c 

s 

,3 

J3 


g 
2 


o 


~  c 

"  o   c^ 
>hK 


.« 


SQ     -    - 

f  ^  I 

.—  o 

>>a_ 

a  3  - 

>.t~"  s 

-t3=o     - 

"°    s 

t-.    ■  Oi 
OOm 

gZt- 
..  o 
S.  o  Z 
a>  5 
i-  -*  .'-" 
m  c  bfl 
ajZ  a 

s 

'3  o 
w 

B^l 
ggm 

|0S 


is50 


ai0'  — 

~  «    C 
a! 

Sco'  — 
ogco 

^m  - 

■^to     - 

S  CO  « 

lis 

~       0    ^ 

S;Z  ^ 

o 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces  333 

Color.  Male  dark  olive  above,  cadi  scale  showing  a  lighter, 
bronzy,  posterior  edge;  sides  with  numerous  deep  Mack  spots,  each 
less  than  half  a  scale  in  size,  frequently  contiguous;  sides,  below 
dark  region,  bluish-gray,  with  lighter  scales  intermixed  which  ap- 
pear to  have  been  reddish  in  life;  snout  and  sides  of  head  generally 
amber  color;  limbs  generally  like  body,  with  small  black  and  light 
flecks,  especially  on  proximal  portion.  Ventral  surface  generally 
light,  some  of  the  scales  of  abdomen  showing  darker  on  anterior 
edges  of  scales. 

Female  with  three  dim  light  stripes  on  back,  olive  in  color,  each 
edged  by  rows  of  black  dots;  lateral  line  represented  by  a  few  dis- 
connected light  spots;  scales  on  side  of  head  edged  more  or  less 
with  brown;  dark  stripes  on  side  more  distinct  than  in  male.  Tail 
colored  like  dorsal  surface  of  body. 

Variation.  The  number  of  scales  around  the  middle  of  body 
varies  from  24  to  26  rows;  24  occurring  eight  times;  25,  once;  26, 
twice.  The  scales  around  the  neck  vary  from  26  to  28;  26,  four 
times;  27,  twice;  and  28,  five  times.  The  upper  labials  are  six  or 
-even.  Counting  both  sides,  six  occurs  fifteen  times  while  seven 
occurs  seven  times;  the  nuchals  are  normally  2-2,  three  occurring 
on  one  side  in  two  cases.  Supraoculars  are  three  or  four;  counting 
both  sides:  three  occurs  four  times;  four  occurs  18  times.  In- 
variably two  postmentals  are  present;  a  postnasal  occurs  on  one 
side  in  one  specimen.  The  frontonasal  is  either  broader  than  long 
or  equally  as  broad  as  long.  The  frontonasal  is  in  contact  with 
frontal  in  a  single  case.  Supraoculars  touching  frontal  are  either 
two  or  three;  three  occurring  fifteen  times,  two  occurring  seven 
times. 

In  color  the  variation  has  to  do  chiefly  with  age,  the  younger  the 
specimen,  the  more  closely  is  juvenile  coloration  approached.  A 
young  specimen  of  pulcher,  when  compared  with  the  young  of 
typical  chinensis,  shows  the  following  differences:  The  dorsolateral 
line  is  broken  throughout  its  length  instead  of  being  continuous;  the 
rounded  labial  spots  are  nearly  surrounded  by  dark  color;  much 
less  so  in  chinensis.  Pits  on  scales  are  smaller  and  spread  over  a 
wider  area  on  edge  of  scale;  in  chinensis  fewer,  and  more  segre- 
gated; light  spots  present  on  frontoparietal.  The  granular  scale 
rows  on  the  lower  eyelid  distinctly  larger  than  in  chinensis.  In  life 
the  red  lateral  coloration  is  probably  more  pronounced  in  pulcher 
than  in  chinensis. 

Remarks.    The  exact  type  locality  of  neither  of  the  two  forms  is 


334  The  University  Science  Bulletin 

known,  but  it  is  highly  probable  that  the  typical  specimens  of 
chinensis  were  collected  on  the  coast  near  Hong  Kong  in  the  vicinity 
of  Canton ;  while  that  of  pulcher  may  have  come  from  Shanghai. 

Distribution.  It  is  uncertain  just  how  sharp  the  line  of  de- 
marcation is  between  the  northern  and  southern  forms  of  this 
Chinese  species.  The  northern  specimens  of  chinensis  pulcher  all 
appear  to  have  been  taken  in  the  lowland  regions  of  the  valley  of 
the  Yangtze  river.  It  seems  probable  that  certain  literature  rec- 
ords of  Eumeces  chinensis  chinensis  actually  belong  to  the  northern 
form.    (See  fig.  50  for  distributional  map. ) 

Locality  records: 

China:    (type,  N.H.M.P.  1). 

Kiangsu:   Shanghai  (C.A.S.  1)  (U.S.N.M.  1);  20  miles  west  of  Shanghai 
(U.S.N.M.  1);  Kangpu  or  Wusung  on  Hangchow  Bay  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Kiangsi:   Suchow  (U.S.N.M.  1). 
Hunan:   Huping  College,  Yochow  (A.M.N.H.  1). 
Anhwei:    Ningkwo  (Field  2)   (A.M.N.H.  4). 

Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger 

(Plate  26;   Figs.  52,  53,  50) 

SYNONYMY 

1901.  Eumeces  kishinouyei  Stejneger.  Proc.  Biol.  Soc.  Wash.,  XIV,  pp.  190,  191  (type 
description;  type  No.  22,  Science  College  Museum,  from  Islands  of  Yayeyama  Group, 
Riu  Kiu  Archipelago);  and  Bull.  U.  S.  Nat.  Mus.,  58,  1907,  pp.  210-213,  figs.  186- 
189  (top,  ventral,  and  lateral  view  of  the  head,  and  underside  of  foot)  (gives  type 
locality  as  Miyakoshima,  Sakishima  group;  Tashiro,  collector);  Barbour,  Proc.  New 
Eng.  Zool.  Club,  IV,  1909,  p.  64  ("Ishigakishima") ;  Van  Denburgh,  Proc.  Cal.  Acad. 
Sci.,  (4),  1908-'13  (1912),  pp.  227,  228  (Miyakoshima  and  Ishigakishima). 

History.  From  material  loaned  by  the  Science  College  Museum, 
Tokyo,  Stejneger  in  1901  described  this  form  briefly,  naming  it 
for  Dr.  K.  Kishinouye  of  the  Imperial  Fisheries  Bureau,  Tokyo. 
The  type  locality  is  Miyakojima,  of  the  southern  Yayeyama  group 
of  the  Riu  Kiu  (Loo  Choo)  chain  which  lies  close  to  the  large 
island  of  Formosa.  The  type  is  No.  22,  Science  College  Museum, 
Tokyo,  Japan. 

Stejneger  later  (1907,  p.  210,  figs.  186-189)  described  the  species 
more  fully,  giving  a  detailed  study  of  a  series  of  specimens  from 
the  Yayeyama  group,  discussing  its  relationship  with  other  related 
forms  and  publishing  line  drawings  of  the  head.  Van  Denburgh 
(1912,  pp.  227-228)  reported  on  seven  specimens  from  the  same 
group:  five  from  the  type  locality;  two  from  the  near-by  island 
Ishigakijima,  from  which  place  Stejneger  had  already  listed  speci- 
mens. 


Taylor:    The  Genus  Eumeces 


:;::.-» 


The  form  is  one  of  the  largest  species  of  the  genus  and,  as  pointed 
out  by  Stejneger,  is  closely  related  to  Eumeces  chinensis. 

Diagnosis.  Characterized  by  a  seven-lined  pattern;  head